For the record, let me first state that I'm NOT (Instant reply for the thick-headed among you: NOT) saying that I've never seen a decent cage match or that there isn't still the occasional decent cage match.
What I am going to say is that the cage match, given its current format and the frequency at which we see it these days, is no longer used the way it should be and is outdated by superior versions of itself. Current use of the cage is bad for business in that it fails to capitalize on the age-old mystique of cage matches as a bloody-feud ender meant to keep everyone inside in and everyone outside out. The cage match, like most gimmick matches in 2010, could be used more efficiently than it currently is.
ILLOGICAL
Could somebody explain to me why a match that was at one point billed as something meant to keep everyone in is decided in many cases by escape from the cage?
This rule has been in place for a long time, but it's always seemed bizarre to me. Why on Earth is escape an option in a match meant to cause a fight to the finish? Isn't running the coward's way out? What kind of face tries to escape the cage rather than win by pin or submission? Why leave an open area for managers, allies, or enemies to get in? Who would try to climb a cage when the door is unlocked? While some cage matches under escape rules can work very well, these questions never stop bugging me. Am I the only one who thinks about these things? Are cage matches in need of a change of rules?
OVERUSED
Remember last year when Chris Jericho won the World Heavyweight Championship by replacing CM Punk in the scramble at Unforgiven?
What kind feud did the two have?
A month+ long chase building up to a major one-on-one meeting at a future pay per view to decide who the true champion was followed by a gimmick match if the feud dicated such?
Nope.
For no real reason, eight days later on Raw the "creative" team blew off what could have been a major feud in a one-off cage match. Of course this also points to a larger problem with the use of gimmick matches, the build to major matches in general, and the consistency of CM Punk's push in 2008. But we're not here to discuss those things. We're here to discuss this half-ass throwing away of what was once considered a GREAT gimmick match. We've seen this kind of thing more times than I'm sure most of us care to remember. It even happened about a month later with Chris Jericho and Batista. Why? Why are we no longer allowed to believe that cage matches are an important tool used to end feuds? Why are they so overused? Can anyone justify this trend?
OUTDATED, OBSOLETE
With the invention of Hell in a Cell, something that has been seen in recent times as a TRUE feud ender (for the purposes of this discussion, we'll try to forget the HIAC pay per view a few months ago), have cage matches decidedly seen their best days? The Hell in a Cell allows one access to weapons, prevents outsiders from getting involved (although I think Paul Heyman made great use of the cell at No Mercy 2002), and has been used quite a lot in recent years to end feuds. Best of all, despite WWE's awful use of it this year, some people (for whatever reason) still buy in to the mystique of this match format. Does this match type prevent the classic cage match from ever making a return to prominence? Could you take the classic cage seriously as a feud-ending structure with the cell looming in the back of your mind? While all gimmick matches could be used more efficiently, is the cage match iself a dead concept?
Use this thread to discuss, agree, or disgree.
What I am going to say is that the cage match, given its current format and the frequency at which we see it these days, is no longer used the way it should be and is outdated by superior versions of itself. Current use of the cage is bad for business in that it fails to capitalize on the age-old mystique of cage matches as a bloody-feud ender meant to keep everyone inside in and everyone outside out. The cage match, like most gimmick matches in 2010, could be used more efficiently than it currently is.
ILLOGICAL
Could somebody explain to me why a match that was at one point billed as something meant to keep everyone in is decided in many cases by escape from the cage?
This rule has been in place for a long time, but it's always seemed bizarre to me. Why on Earth is escape an option in a match meant to cause a fight to the finish? Isn't running the coward's way out? What kind of face tries to escape the cage rather than win by pin or submission? Why leave an open area for managers, allies, or enemies to get in? Who would try to climb a cage when the door is unlocked? While some cage matches under escape rules can work very well, these questions never stop bugging me. Am I the only one who thinks about these things? Are cage matches in need of a change of rules?
Also, why aren't dog-collar or bullrope matches used more often with a "nowhere to run" build? A different thread for a different day I suppose.
OVERUSED
Remember last year when Chris Jericho won the World Heavyweight Championship by replacing CM Punk in the scramble at Unforgiven?
What kind feud did the two have?
A month+ long chase building up to a major one-on-one meeting at a future pay per view to decide who the true champion was followed by a gimmick match if the feud dicated such?
Nope.
For no real reason, eight days later on Raw the "creative" team blew off what could have been a major feud in a one-off cage match. Of course this also points to a larger problem with the use of gimmick matches, the build to major matches in general, and the consistency of CM Punk's push in 2008. But we're not here to discuss those things. We're here to discuss this half-ass throwing away of what was once considered a GREAT gimmick match. We've seen this kind of thing more times than I'm sure most of us care to remember. It even happened about a month later with Chris Jericho and Batista. Why? Why are we no longer allowed to believe that cage matches are an important tool used to end feuds? Why are they so overused? Can anyone justify this trend?
OUTDATED, OBSOLETE
With the invention of Hell in a Cell, something that has been seen in recent times as a TRUE feud ender (for the purposes of this discussion, we'll try to forget the HIAC pay per view a few months ago), have cage matches decidedly seen their best days? The Hell in a Cell allows one access to weapons, prevents outsiders from getting involved (although I think Paul Heyman made great use of the cell at No Mercy 2002), and has been used quite a lot in recent years to end feuds. Best of all, despite WWE's awful use of it this year, some people (for whatever reason) still buy in to the mystique of this match format. Does this match type prevent the classic cage match from ever making a return to prominence? Could you take the classic cage seriously as a feud-ending structure with the cell looming in the back of your mind? While all gimmick matches could be used more efficiently, is the cage match iself a dead concept?
Use this thread to discuss, agree, or disgree.
