are there too many DQ finishes?

[ACTAFOOL]

yes there are too many DQ finishes and its annoying, i know they do this so that neither of the 2 lose face b4 the actual big title match, but i just think its stupid and doesnt entertain me... really if i didnt download the PPVs for free i wouldnt buy one of them the whole year, all of them sucked, and i feel bad for the fans who actually paid to see them, though u should learn that when the PPVs are so bad, stop buying them!.. WWE wont change if fans keep buying this crap, read the results, download it, or just watch raw the next week, but stop giving WWE money.. please.. lol they have enough

i dont think we need DQs for the wrestlers to save face, we can have a normal feud where they face off and one of them actually pins the other to win, as long as the match was close, like kaz and angles match last night on impact, the guy who loses doesnt really lose face, i dont see why 1 week the challenger for the title cant beat the champ, and next week in a rematch the champ beats him, u know what i mean? it will be obvious both of them are pretty much equal and at the PPV no1 will really know who will win

they were doing this with batista and undertaker, win, win, tie tie.. and now to see who will get the last win, now this is a great feud, its got actual wins and losses, the others are just DQ, DQ, interference, tag match, ppv match... now wich one is more entertaining in your opinion? cuz for me its an easy choice...

 

[NeoScyther]

So, when you said "we" with regards to getting screwed, you were talking about everyone else. Gotcha.

Face it, you tripped yourself up.

September 1 - CM Punk wins the ECW World Title

July 17th - Great Khali won the WHC on Smackdown.

May 8th - Edge won the WHC on Smackdown.

There's three main-event title changes on free TV in the last 7 months.

Happy now?

hello put it correctly. When you look at those three title changes, they were because the champ had to drop the title for some reason. Well, let's add in the rest of the sentence for each scenario, shall we?

September 1 - CM Punk wins the ECW World Title...because John Morrison got suspended.

July 17th - Great Khali won the WHC on Smackdown...because Edge was injured and had to vacate the title, and Khali won a 20 man battle royal.

May 8th - Edge won the WHC on Smackdown...because Undertaker was injured and had to drop the belt, and Edge had Kennedy's Money in the Bank shot due to him being injured.

IOW, all three of those scenarios are because the champions HAD to drop the title in one sense or another (due to injuries or suspensions).

 

[Slyfox696]

hello put it correctly. When you look at those three title changes, they were because the champ had to drop the title for some reason. Well, let's add in the rest of the sentence for each scenario, shall we?

September 1 - CM Punk wins the ECW World Title...because John Morrison got suspended.

July 17th - Great Khali won the WHC on Smackdown...because Edge was injured and had to vacate the title, and Khali won a 20 man battle royal.

May 8th - Edge won the WHC on Smackdown...because Undertaker was injured and had to drop the belt, and Edge had Kennedy's Money in the Bank shot due to him being injured.

IOW, all three of those scenarios are because the champions HAD to drop the title in one sense or another (due to injuries or suspensions).

Yes, but if you're not an Internet wrestling fan, you don't know about that. You don't know that John Morrison was suspended. You don't know that the Undertaker was injured. So, 2 out of the 3 were legitimate title wins, as far as wrestling fans should be concerned.

And, I could not care less what "hello" thinks, the fact is both ECW and Smackdown titles are main-event World titles, and qualify for the discussion.

So, then, maybe the problem isn't the giving away of title changes for free TV, it's the fact viewers should quit bitching about things they should actually know nothing about. The fact they spoil themselves to these things should not be held against the WWE.

Again, the argument fails.

 

[Papa Shango]

Yes, but if you're not an Internet wrestling fan, you don't know about that. You don't know that John Morrison was suspended. You don't know that the Undertaker was injured. So, 2 out of the 3 were legitimate title wins, as far as wrestling fans should be concerned.

And, I could not care less what "hello" thinks, the fact is both ECW and Smackdown titles are main-event World titles, and qualify for the discussion.

So, then, maybe the problem isn't the giving away of title changes for free TV, it's the fact viewers should quit bitching about things they should actually know nothing about. The fact they spoil themselves to these things should not be held against the WWE.

Again, the argument fails.

I'm not quite sure what being an Internet Wrestling Fan or not has to do with it. I mean, true, if you don't cruise the internet forums, you don't usually learn about these sorts of things. But why does that matter? We're not talking about non IWC fans. We're talking about us, the guys IN THE CONVERSATION. And we know that the only reason those title changes occurred on TV was because they had to do it. Immediately. Undertaker needed to rehab immediately. Edge had to rehab his torn pec immediately. John Morrison's name was leaked, so he had to serve his suspension immediately.
Wait a minute, what does this even have to do with the topic at hand? The topic is are there too many DQ finishes in WWE, NOT are there too few title changes on free television. You guts wanna keep arguing for the sake of arguing, then start a new thread about it. Or send private messages to each other. Nobody likes being a third party to a lover's quarrell
Now, I believe the last person who technically added to the real discussion at hand was ACTAFOOL. I agreed with his example of Batista and Undertaker. True there were a couple of draws, but they've eached exchanged wins and the draws really just helped intensify the fued. The same thing with the HHH-HBK fued that lasted two years. They traded wins, World Championships, fought to a draw in a Last Man Standing Match, and finished it in a fantastic 45-minute Hell in a Cell. As far as I remember, they didn't have a single match end in a DQ, and even if it did, it did nothing to slow the fued.
Now will someone please respond to this and not the tangent that Hello and Slyfox are engaged in? Seriously, Slyfox, take it easy. It can't be healthy to always be arguing with someone. And knowing you, because I'm "calling you out" so to speak, you're going to retort. So please spare everyone else and send me a private message airing out your problems with this post.
'Nuff said. Rant over. I'm outta here.
Excelsior!!

 

[Slyfox696]

I'm not quite sure what being an Internet Wrestling Fan or not has to do with it.

It makes their argument irrelevant.

I mean, true, if you don't cruise the internet forums, you don't usually learn about these sorts of things. But why does that matter? We're not talking about non IWC fans. We're talking about us, the guys IN THE CONVERSATION. And we know that the only reason those title changes occurred on TV was because they had to do it. Immediately. Undertaker needed to rehab immediately. Edge had to rehab his torn pec immediately. John Morrison's name was leaked, so he had to serve his suspension immediately.

But, you can't complain because the WWE is giving away non-DQ title matches on free TV. Which, is the whole point of this thread.

WWE having DQ finishes, and people having to pay for them. It's in the opening post.

Wait a minute, what does this even have to do with the topic at hand?

Talking about DQ matches, and how no title match on free TV ends with a DQ-free finish, or even have titles change hands.

The topic is are there too many DQ finishes in WWE, NOT are there too few title changes on free television. You guts wanna keep arguing for the sake of arguing, then start a new thread about it.

Actually, "hello" started this thread, and was the one who took his own idea and topic down the current road, all of which ties back to the original topic.

Or send private messages to each other. Nobody likes being a third party to a lover's quarrell

Then leave?

Not really my fault nor my concern how you feel in the thread.

Now will someone please respond to this and not the tangent that Hello and Slyfox are engaged in?

The tangent is related to the topic, which was created by "hello". Who are you to say what the topic is about?

Seriously, Slyfox, take it easy.

"Fuck easy." - Roger Murtagh

It can't be healthy to always be arguing with someone.

Why not?

Enjoyable, keeps mind sharp and keeps me in good practice. I don't see a problem with it.

And knowing you, because I'm "calling you out" so to speak, you're going to retort.

Calling me out has nothing to do with. I just disagree with your post.

So please spare everyone else and send me a private message airing out your problems with this post.

No.

You're not going to tell me where I can post and when. If you don't like the way I post, leave the thread. It's really not that difficult. There are plenty of threads on this board I do not post in. If you don't like my posting style, go there.

But, I wish to post in this thread, about the topic determined by "hello" and really could not give a damn what you think about that.

 

[pockets]

DQ's seem like a way to drag on a storyline the company wants to keep going because they simply cannot think of a new or better direction.

EXACTLY, this is the point I was waiting for someone to make. remember when they used to have IDEAS and storylines changed...nowadays it seems they are just trying to kill time and prolong whatever they have until they think of something new. i dunno maybe we got spoiled.

im glad this thread was made, i thought i was the only one who noticed basically EVERY damn match ends with bullshit. and im not just talking about main event matches either...if you see a solid mid-card matchup coming up (like a finley vs matt hardy match), you know for a fact that its gonna end with bullshit. a big clue that the match is gonna end with interference is if its a solid 10+ minute match where both wrestlers are evenly matched and you are thinking that the match is surprisingly good. thats when u know khali is coming down to the ring and destroying everybody for no damn reason.

words can not explain how happy i was with the undertaker khali match where taker made him tap out in the middle of the ring. i was rejoicing. it was incredible to finally see a fair n square, satisfying major win in the middle of the ring. i think also last week finely beat rey fair n square, which i thought was nice.

There would have NO POINT in a title change of that magnitude at a C-Grade PPV.

^what does that even mean tho, a c-grade PPV? correct me if im wrong but a PPV is supposed to be a big event, hence you pay for it...so the c-grade for a ppv shouldnt even exist. of course the card for GAB isnt gonna be as impressive as WM but a title match on GAB should finish better than a raw or smackdown match. remember when title changes occurred on any ppv, even on "c-grade" ppvs (lol). as fans, we are supposed to expect a good finish and not excuse them for giving us a crappy show because its not a "big-four" ppv.

IOW, all three of those scenarios are because the champions HAD to drop the title in one sense or another (due to injuries or suspensions).

^im gonna disagree, i dont know about you guys but even tho i knew the "backstage" reason for the title change, i was still excited to see it happening on tv i.e. the real-life world. when punk beat morrison, its the wwe making a statement that punk was better than morrison on that night. and isnt that why we watch wrestling, to find out which of the two wrestlers, according to them, is better.

 

[king booker]

yeah DQ finishes r happening wayyyyyy too much. i think the ppl who r paied 2 make these dorylines should all be fired and replaced by everyday fans who know what people really want 2 c on raw sd ecw or a ppv.
Q:How many times do u c a lowblow a weapon interferance or something like that used 2 finish a match
A: 9 out of 10 of all matches.
something has 2 change, some more wins via submission would b good, the last one i rember (besided the pethetic no holds bared match on sd where 1 rule was broken (kahli vs taker)) was a CM Punk anaconda vice, what happened to that move???

 

[hello]

Yes, but if you're not an Internet wrestling fan, you don't know about that. You don't know that John Morrison was suspended. You don't know that the Undertaker was injured. So, 2 out of the 3 were legitimate title wins, as far as wrestling fans should be concerned.


So, then, maybe the problem isn't the giving away of title changes for free TV, it's the fact viewers should quit bitching about things they should actually know nothing about. The fact they spoil themselves to these things should not be held against the WWE.

.

wrong, wwe.com puts up a bunch of videos when guys get hurt and go through surgery so we ARE supposed to know about these injuries, edge, cena, lashley, batista (when he tore his tricep and gave up the belt, angle won it that night)... also they are putting up suspensions now so we will know the next time if someone drops a title all of a sudden



and anyone who;s not an idiot can see why the belts changed hands, they dont have a title match for 6 months, then all of a sudden there is a title match on smackdown, something is fishy...

 

[legendary.20]

I agree that there are too many DQ finishes, mainly because I am a fan of heels more than faces and I like to see them win clean which never happens. One of the greatest matches I have seen this year was Finlay vs Rey a couple weeks back just because it was a main event match where the heel won with his finisher clean.

The other thing I hate that happens way too much is a rollup finish. It seems like we can't have a card without there being at least one DQ finish and one rollup finish. Even in the midcard they can't seem to have a clean finish with someone's finisher. Does Cody Rhodes even have a finisher? I have never seen him win with anything other than a rollup.

 

[Jeremy Dick]

^Cody won a few matches with the DDT. It seems that's what they give to new wrestlers with no finisher.. that or the pumphandle slam. But I am in agreeance about people always jobbing to weak roll-ups. It's not so bad if it's a move like an inside cradle, but a simple roll-up where it's very obvious that the opponent could easily put a shoulder up is annoying and unrealistic. But I do prefer it over the run-in/DQ finish.

 

[jback]

I'd have to say that I think that their is to many DQ finishes, but I see y the wwe does them. With a DQ finish to a match u make the heel wrestler seem more pathetic and mean which puts more heat on them and for the faces its a way for the fans to feel sorry for them and for the fans to like the faces more. But the wwe needs to realize but having either one of the opponents win cleanly u make the fans happier and more entertained.

 

[Burngun]

I think too many DQ's (and also count-out's) are used to try and put over heels as assholes now-a-days. I think they could easily do that in different fashion, such as low blows whilst the ref has turned away, taking the turnbuckle padding off (that hasn't been used that much in the past year or so), backstage attacks, attacking during an entrance, hitting the referee with their finisher etc etc.

I also think a DQ finish at a PPV just plain sucks and is a waste of people's money. We payed to see someone winning, and unless its a great way to end a match without a pin or submission (e.g. move through the announce table), then its just a waste of time.

 

[Papa Shango]

It makes their argument irrelevant.

But, you can't complain because the WWE is giving away non-DQ title matches on free TV. Which, is the whole point of this thread.

WWE having DQ finishes, and people having to pay for them. It's in the opening post.

Talking about DQ matches, and how no title match on free TV ends with a DQ-free finish, or even have titles change hands.

Actually, "hello" started this thread, and was the one who took his own idea and topic down the current road, all of which ties back to the original topic.

Then leave?

Not really my fault nor my concern how you feel in the thread.

The tangent is related to the topic, which was created by "hello". Who are you to say what the topic is about?

"Fuck easy." - Roger Murtagh


Why not?

Enjoyable, keeps mind sharp and keeps me in good practice. I don't see a problem with it.

Calling me out has nothing to do with. I just disagree with your post.

No.

You're not going to tell me where I can post and when. If you don't like the way I post, leave the thread. It's really not that difficult. There are plenty of threads on this board I do not post in. If you don't like my posting style, go there.

But, I wish to post in this thread, about the topic determined by "hello" and really could not give a damn what you think about that.

How does the argument become irrelevant?

Actually, the point of this thread is DQ finishes in wrestling, not just title matches in general.

Originally posted by hello-
it seems the only time there are any clean finishes on raw is if its a squash match to put over some new talent. kurt angle made a comment about this a month ago and i think its true, that fans want to see clean finishes. theres a lot more clean finishes on TNA it seems, Raw, there is always someone randomly coming down to the ring and attacking just for the hell of it.


i cant tell you how frustratring and repetitive it is to see a great match for 15 min then have some heel come in and hit some one or someone low blows to stop the match. anyone else agree on this? thoughts?



even on PPV, look at Cena Dq'ing himself at unforgiven, what an awful way to end a wwe title match that people payed $40 to see... thats just stealing the fans money at that point, and expecting them to pay to see the next ppv which will be a rematch but in some type of gimmick match.


look at cyber sunday, title match ends in a DQ by low blow, and now we're supposed to pay to see the next ppv again, to see the same match but now with a stupid gimmick of 'no sweet chin music.'

Hello clearly is talking about wrestling in general. He even starts by talking about RAW. He uses a few PPV examples, true, but he's clearly voicing his opinion on wrestling in general. And not once in his first post does he say anything about having every TV title match end in DQ. You are just nit-picking at one part of his argument to make it easier for yourself.

You took the thread in this direction, and now hello is trying to back up his words. You picked out a tiny part of the whole discussion so that you can dominate the thread with your opinions. Now, for the most part, I agree with you that there really aren't TOO MANY DQ's in wrestling, although there are alot. But I don't think its reight that you're trying to sabotage Hello by changing everything around. PROVE to me that you're not purposely deterring away from points of the argument that you can't defend.

NO, I will not leave, because I have as much right to post here as you do. Just because you have the uncanny ability to polarize almost everyone, including people who share your opinions, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting here and calling you on things that I think need to addressed. I can be just as stubborn as you pal.

Uh, HELLOOOoo!! The name of the post is "Are there too many DQ finishes?" Once again, your argument fails.

Lethal Weapon references aren't going to get you anywhere.

Why do have to keep in good practice in arguing, unless your a lawyer. An 11-year-old lawyer. Yeah, I know, you're not REALLY 11.

I have no problem wheter you disagree with my post. I'm just saying that if you do, give me some negative rep. Or Send me a private message letting me know your thoughts on my post, rather then attempt to publicly humiliate me on the forum... and fail.

I'm not telling you that you can't post here. You have every right to post here. But you are being detrimental to the thread. I just don't find it fair for you to monopolize every discussion you are a part of. And if every person who you told to stop posting here if they didn't like what you had to say actually stopped posting, eventually you would be the only person left on this forum. Something tells me you would like that.

I will not stop posting here, because I want to post here. And I will keep putting people in check if they detract from the threads and BULLY the other posters.

Sorry, but I am NOT intimidated by you. My apologies if you're not used to that.

Ugh... Warrior fans... they all grew up to be the same. I gotta go smack my cousin Sean now. You'd probably like him. He loves Ultimate Warrior AND he does nothing but argue.

Out.

 

[Slyfox696]

How does the argument become irrelevant?

Because, then, on the topic of the side discussion which is related to the original topic, it means they are ruining it themselves. It's not like the WWE is not providing clean finish no DQ title matches on free TV, just that "they don't count" because, since they are on the internet, they know WHY the matches are taking place.

Actually, the point of this thread is DQ finishes in wrestling, not just title matches in general.

And, I've already given my opinion on the subject, and addressed the one person who disagreed with me. I said it was fine because it allows both wrestlers to come out of the match without looking weak.

Hello clearly is talking about wrestling in general. He even starts by talking about RAW. He uses a few PPV examples, true, but he's clearly voicing his opinion on wrestling in general. And not once in his first post does he say anything about having every TV title match end in DQ. You are just nit-picking at one part of his argument to make it easier for yourself.

You took the thread in this direction, and now hello is trying to back up his words. You picked out a tiny part of the whole discussion so that you can dominate the thread with your opinions. Now, for the most part, I agree with you that there really aren't TOO MANY DQ's in wrestling, although there are alot. But I don't think its reight that you're trying to sabotage Hello by changing everything around. PROVE to me that you're not purposely deterring away from points of the argument that you can't defend.

NO, I will not leave, because I have as much right to post here as you do. Just because you have the uncanny ability to polarize almost everyone, including people who share your opinions, that doesn't mean I'm going to stop posting here and calling you on things that I think need to addressed. I can be just as stubborn as you pal.

Uh, HELLOOOoo!! The name of the post is "Are there too many DQ finishes?" Once again, your argument fails.

Lethal Weapon references aren't going to get you anywhere.

Why do have to keep in good practice in arguing, unless your a lawyer. An 11-year-old lawyer. Yeah, I know, you're not REALLY 11.

I have no problem wheter you disagree with my post. I'm just saying that if you do, give me some negative rep. Or Send me a private message letting me know your thoughts on my post, rather then attempt to publicly humiliate me on the forum... and fail.

I'm not telling you that you can't post here. You have every right to post here. But you are being detrimental to the thread. I just don't find it fair for you to monopolize every discussion you are a part of. And if every person who you told to stop posting here if they didn't like what you had to say actually stopped posting, eventually you would be the only person left on this forum. Something tells me you would like that.

I will not stop posting here, because I want to post here. And I will keep putting people in check if they detract from the threads and BULLY the other posters.

Sorry, but I am NOT intimidated by you. My apologies if you're not used to that.

Ugh... Warrior fans... they all grew up to be the same. I gotta go smack my cousin Sean now. You'd probably like him. He loves Ultimate Warrior AND he does nothing but argue.

Out.

The rest of this I will respond to through PM, as it is nothing but personal comments, spamming up the thread and attacking me. I don't really care but it seems you are trying to derail this topic about something completely irrelevant and unrelated, to take it on a personal level. A PM will be coming your way.

 

[Papa Shango]

Alright, so me and Slyfox talked things through. He's actually a pretty cool guy. I apologized, and he accepted my apology. Now, since it was my fault for taking this thing off subject, I shall take it upon myself to steer the conversation back on track. And I'm NOT trying to be a MOD. I just feel responsible for meesin' things up.
Now, once again, I say that there are a lot of DQ's in wrestling, but it's not entirely a bad thing. It intensifies fueds, prolongs storyline length. It leads to PPV matches that actually matter.

 

[BigMike1994]

There have been Way to many DQ finishes latley it really annoys me when someone gets DQ'd on pourpose like John Cena at Unforgiven i really thought orton was going to win that match. Just last night on RAW Snisky came in and attacked Jeff Hardy becasue hes a "monster" well then put him in a cage because I think everyones getting sick of these DQ finishes, these DQ finishes are a way to carry on a story line but there doing it way to often and it is repetitive and boring to see this every week. It is also very fustrating to see a great 15 to 30 minute match get ruined by some ugly behemoth.

 

[DX_Guy]

I completely agree it seems like when the feud is to tight like the taker/batista feud they will make dq finishes or draws or like in the HHH/Umaga lumberjack finlay came in and attacked HHH i mena seriously we need clean finishes

 

[Papa Shango]

I completely agree it seems like when the feud is to tight like the taker/batista feud they will make dq finishes or draws or like in the HHH/Umaga lumberjack finlay came in and attacked HHH i mena seriously we need clean finishes

But if once one guy beats another guy cleanly then there's no point in having them wrestle again. Once there's a clean finish in a fued then it's time to move on to another fued. Every fued would only last like a month. Eventually everyone will have faced each other and we'd have nothing left to see.

 

[BigMike1994]

But if once one guy beats another guy cleanly then there's no point in having them wrestle again. Once there's a clean finish in a fued then it's time to move on to another fued. Every fued would only last like a month. Eventually everyone will have faced each other and we'd have nothing left to see.

Yes thats true nut there must be some other way to carry on a storyline I dont remember this happening back in the WWE Attitude Era back then Entertainment was entertaining us, How about this, A heel superstar comes in after his face opponent has one the match and completly destroys him side lining for ages, this face then returns and does the same thing to him; somthing like that but with a more complicated plot. Batista VS Triple H for the World Heavyweight Championchip Fued, I can not remember any DQ finishes, Same goes for the Legend VS Legend Killer with Randy Orton and The Undertaker. WWE has done t before I just think they forgot how due to some of the talent thats on the current roster

 

[Papa Shango]

Yes thats true nut there must be some other way to carry on a storyline I dont remember this happening back in the WWE Attitude Era back then Entertainment was entertaining us, How about this, A heel superstar comes in after his face opponent has one the match and completly destroys him side lining for ages, this face then returns and does the same thing to him; somthing like that but with a more complicated plot. Batista VS Triple H for the World Heavyweight Championchip Fued, I can not remember any DQ finishes, Same goes for the Legend VS Legend Killer with Randy Orton and The Undertaker. WWE has done t before I just think they forgot how due to some of the talent thats on the current roster

I don't remember WWE doing that injury angle during the attitude era, except for when someone had to be written out due to real injury. WWE can't afford to have it's top superstars faking an injury for long periods of time. And HHH/Batista is different because HHH got a rematch clause in his champions contract so there's almost always gonna be a rematch in a title fued. PLUS Batista had to wrestle Edge before HHH got another shot in the HIAC. And Taker/Randy Orton is different because they were on different brands the first time they wrestled. Then Randy Orton went to SD and decided to get revenge on Taker. I also meant to mention before that it's fine to have a rubber match which is what ended up happening with Taker/Orton... in a Casket Match. Taker's the only person who can do the "I was seemingly destroyed in my brutal signature match but I'm back from the dead to get revenge" schtick to lengthen a fued. Fueds that just go back and forth with wins and losses, or fueds where only one guy compiles all of the victories, get old REAL quick. A DQ draws out a fued and leads people to become more interested in finding out who is truly the better man.