Can We Really Complain About Seeing a Match Again?

[Rockforpresident]

Maybe wrestlers (in a wrestling capacity) should only have a shelf life of maybe no longer than 10 years instead of this being around for 15-20 years concept since the fans do get tired of seeing the same people constantly.

I have a problem with this. When I look at Michaels who has put on match of the year performances 3 out of the last 4 years? Yes, he and Taker are both showing their age now, neither move as smoothly as they once did. Are either of them ready to hang it up? Nope, don't think so. Though if I had to choose I would have to think Taker is the worse for wear between the two of them. I am personally hoping Michaels breaks the streak this year, as I really want to see one more title run out of the guy before he hangs it up. With the work this guy has done for the company all these years, he deserves it more than anyone else. Just my opinion and probably for another thread.

As for Cena vs Batista, it has not been over done, and as has been pointed out already, there is a whole different dynamic this time. Batista looks more focused and dangerous than he has in years. He also looks more energized than he has in years. Cena is a whole lot better than a lot of people give him credit for. Yes, it may be time for him to do a HHH and get out of the title scene for a bit with a side project. Help elevate some of the new guys, but it's Wrestlemania time baby! Time to put all the big names (and bigger little names) in the spot light.

Cena vs Batista will be awesome, maybe not a five star match, but it will rock. You have the two biggest behemoths in the WWE going at eachother and this time there is bad blood between them. Also, don't count out the whole Bret Hart / Vince McMahon part of the equation yet. Vince inviting Hart back for next weeks show kinda got my spider sense tingling. Taker vs Michaels will steal the show again, though Edge vs Jericho could give them a good run for the money this year, especially if they let it all loose as they usually do at Wrestlemania. Back to Taker/Michaels, with the added stipulation of Michaels career on the line, that will make it even better, similar to Flair's match 2 years ago. Money in the Bank will be great as always and if Punk gets in, which he probably will, he can go for 3 in a row.

So I say relax and watch the show unfold. Stop hating and enjoy the fact we have some really high quality matches coming. And remember, the master reset button is usually pushed after WM anyway so before long we will have a whole lot of new(old) feuds to talk(whine) about.

 

[WHAT]

definitely have to agree here. Since Bret Hart is back, i think it is fair to mention a little history here that proves Cena and Batista can have a sickkkk match at Mania.

In Novemeber 1996, Hart and Stone Cold had an awesome match at Survivor Series. Just months later at Mania, they put on, IMO, one of the best Wrestlemania matches of all time. Just because Cena and Batista fought at Summerslam doesnt mean they shouldnt wrestle at Mania. This feud is being built up perfectly and I personally cant wait to see them get in the ring together and put on what will definitely be on the best matches of the year.

 

[nwojeff]

If they ended the roster split, do you HONESTLY believe that they would keep around THAT MANY wrestlers. The only reason the roster split even happened was because when World Wrestling Federation Incorporated purchased the assets pertaining to World Champion Wrestling from AOL-Time Warner, they also picked up the contracts of MANY of it's performers. This was one of the main reasons why guys like Brian Kendrick and Bryan Danielson were released back in the day. There were just too many mouths to feed to have one "WWE" Brand.

If the Brand Split were to end, do you realize how many guys will be out of a job. The Brand Split is the major reason why guys that would have been considered borderline in the past are actually part of the roster. The Brand Split is the reason why there are guys in WWE named Kofi Kingston and Evan Bourne, instead of having independent guys named Kofi Mensah and Matthew Korklan.

Keeping the Brand Split, as derided as it is amongst the smarks, not only is good for WWE's bottom line (more house shows, more international tours, more stars to market) but it's also been good for the wrestling "industry". Look at the indies that book guys and market them as "Former WWE Superstar", there would be even less of them around.
Like I said earlier, the only way that you're going to rectify the Main Event Picture is combining the World Titles. You combine the roster, the wrestlers in WWE are the ones that will take a major hit.

This is my first post here, but whenever I see any discussion of the brand split and combining the world titles I feel the need to add my opinion, and it's quite a lengthy opinion, but hear me out.

First of all, I agree with your point about improving the main event picture by combining the world titles. If the brand split is going to continue to exist, which by all indications it is for the foreseeable future, then we at least need to have one champion. As it is, neither title means what the WWE title once meant, especially when you compare it to the prestige of the undisputed title after the Invasion angle ended. Every wrestler in the company should have one goal and one ultimate prize to shoot for, not two, and there should be one guy at all times who is the face of the company. Having two world champions makes no sense to me because it waters down the entire product. The WWF did fine with one champion from 1963-2001.

The undisputed WWE champion would have to travel to both TV shows and possibly more house shows and might have to be in the public eye a little more, but that's the price you pay for being the champion and face of the company. The WWE could add in financial bonuses and other perks for the champion, but at the end of the day, they should remind the champion that it's an honor and a privlege to be the WWE champion and the extra responsibilities and travel are part of the deal.

But I could not disagree more with the rest of your argument, mainly these two statements:

"If the Brand Split were to end, do you realize how many guys will be out of a job."

"Look at the indies that book guys and market them as "Former WWE Superstar", there would be even less of them around."

My responses to these two statements are who cares and so what. I hate to be so cold and callous, but I am sick and tired of the IWC looking at things from the perspective of the wrestlers or from the perspective of the wrestling promotions. WE ARE FANS. Our job is not to worry about wrestlers' employment, or the WWE bottom line, or even what's "best for the industry," although we do want it to do well overall. Our role in this whole game is that we want to be entertained. Or at least that should be our role.

Most members of the IWC don't work for WWE, they are not wrestlers or executives or involved with the business of wrestling in any way, shape or form. Most of us are not even wrestling journalists, so the main point of coming on these forums and offering our ideas and opinions is for our own enjoyment and to maybe help to improve the product in some indirect way so that we could be better entertained in the future.

So when I read things like "what about the guys who would lose their job if they ended the brand split," I get very annoyed, because honestly it's not our concern. And this isn't just meant for you JJohns, because I've seen and heard this argument from many different people. If a wrestler is not a main eventer, upper mid carder, or low carder who is part of the future of the company, than why is it of any concern to you if they are fired and forced to work the indpendent circuit for the rest of their career? This should not even be an issue, unless you are an actual WWE undercard wrestler who doesn't draw money for the company, or if you are a family member or friend of a wrestler and you frequent this forum, which is unlikely.

The statement you made about the indy promotions not being able to market guys as former WWE superstars is not even really relevant. Again, so what? Too bad for them. This doesn't really hurt the industry at all and holds no bearing on the decision to recombine the rosters.

Finally, like I said before in the reasons to combine the world titles into an undisputed champion, the WWF did fine with one roster of around 45-55 male superstars from January of 1963 through April of 2002. The company was definitely losing it's audience gradually from the spring of 2001 until the brand extension, but you can't tell me that the brand split wasn't a self-inflicted wound that has kept the company down much longer than it should have been for the past 8 years.

Other than allowing Vince McMahon to make more profits from having double the amount of house shows per year, I see no other benefit from it. We have lesser quality TV shows, lesser quality pay per views, inexplicably two meaningless world championship belts, and an audience that is sick of seeing a stale, bland, repetitve product. We have a group of guys that shouldn't be employed because there are two rosters, and two groups of upper mid carders and main eventers that aren't big enough and are forced to keep feuding with each other because there is not one super roster like there should be.

Really, any argument in favor of the brand split is asinine, unless you are a WWE jobber or Vince McMahon himself, who benefits more from having 8 subpar house shows and 4 subpar TV shows a week than having 4 good house shows and 1 great TV show a week. In the wrestling industry, I believe that less is more. Less TV shows, less house shows, less pay per views, equals more quality content from the promotion. Anyone who demands better entertainment from the WWE should be in favor of recombining the titles and abolishing the brand split.

 

[Shocky]

If we're talking about Cena vs. Batista in particular, and it being over done, then whoever feels that way is a complete idiot. Are we seriously this petty that Cena vs. Batitsa has been done to death?

To those that think so, how? Summerslam two years ago was their only proper match. The Elimination Chamber match was as much of a match as it was a segment, and the rematch last night on Raw was another gimmick as well. These two have had one proper match in recent memory, and if that is too much, you are far too picky as a fan.

In general, do feuds drag on, yes and no. If two guys work together, and work well, i can watch them wrestle a dozen times. Take for instance two guys like Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit, or the Rock and Mick Foley. These feuds just had the "it" factor, and the ability for the two guys to work and work wonders with each other. If you have a feud like Orton and Triple H where the two have zero chemistry, then it doesn't work.

 

[shafe_41]

I'm pretty much with the majority here as well in thinking that the people bitching about Cena/Batista at Mania is ******ed. They are ******ed. Cena/Batista is superwin at Mania this year. Why? Because like many have already stated, this will only be their 2nd proper match against each other. Plus, it adds a much better dynamic with Batista coming in as not just a heel, but a mega-heel champion. Their first match was better than I expected. I expect this one will be an under-the-radar show-stealer. Yes. I said it. Who expects a 5-star match from these two? Nobody. Batista always puts on a good match at Mania regardless of how boring you think he may be. Cena... love him or hate him, he always... ALWAYS tries to put 150% into his matches for the fans. I seriously don't believe there's anybody in the WWE or wrestling period right now that loves the fans, the crowd, the atmosphere, and the business more than John Cena. That would be damn difficult to prove, but I'd bet the farm on it. These two will exceed all expectations and not deliver the powerbump fest that everybody probably expects.

If we complain about anything, it should be HBK/Taker 2. Why? Because stipulations have been added and while that usually makes a match more interesting, having HBK involved in a match 2 of the last 3 years with a career on the line in some form is ridiculous. Especially when it's HBK's "career" and we know damn well he's not going to leave the WWE after Mania. Time off? Sure. But be done? Not a chance. This leads us to believe that Taker will lose the match, which is poppycock. Will it be a great match? Undoubtedly. But it takes the "anything can happen" feel away from Wrestlemania. Who knows? Maybe Taker can win it and have HBK come back in 5 months while creative thinks of a way to bring him back in a fashion that doesn't look cheap and stupid. Only time will tell this though.

 

[One of a kind]

I was one of the people who said that they were exvited about seeing cena vs batista. It doesn't really matter how many times you see the match because sometimes it can turn out to be a great match.

 

[biziorek]

yeh pple should complain! any1 thats sick of wwes repetitiveness! tna doesnt often do stuff more than once and when they do they make it interesting! theres more to it then just a rematch! for tha pple that wanna watch something over and over and over, instead of watching wwe each week, why don't u just record an episode and watch that a few times?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I'm looking forward to Cena and Batista at WM. Batista's current character as a heel is great. He's fresh to a lot of Raw viewers that, for whatever reason, don't get to watch Smackdown. His match with Cena last night was a quality beatdown angle and there's a lot to go with. There's still nearly 5 weeks until WrestleMania and there's a lot that can be done with this.

As for the complaints, yeah there are always going to be complaints no matter what happens. Complaints are par for the course when it comes to the WWE as far as the IWC in general is concerned.

 

[CH David]

yeh pple should complain! any1 thats sick of wwes repetitiveness! tna doesnt often do stuff more than once and when they do they make it interesting! theres more to it then just a rematch! for tha pple that wanna watch something over and over and over, instead of watching wwe each week, why don't u just record an episode and watch that a few times?

Excuse me. Umm...what? This makes no sense, and you sound like a blind WWE hater. The WWE has been repetitive at times, but seriously, tell me how Batista vs. Cena is repetitive. One true match that happened, which was two years ago. Oh dear lord, they are having a second match, how dare they be repetitive!!! Shut up. And I mean that. Shut up. Did you watch Raw last night? It was a damn fine episode. It had a basic formula with the guest host, but it was very well done.

They are going into Wrestlemania hard. And get this, the only repetition so far, is HBK vs. Taker, and to complain about a match like that, you should be ashamed of yourself. Batista vs. Cena, done once as face vs. face. Batista is now a heel, and is proving to be a much tougher opponent now than he was in 2008. Edge vs. Jericho, not much repetition, unless something happened like over 5 years ago. I don't remember much going back that far. Other than that, a possible Triple H vs. Sheamus, I am hoping for this, they haven't gone against each other. Possibly an Orton vs. DiBiase match, oh wait, they had one or two matches on Raw, they are going to repeat themselves. Silly me.

Oh and by the way, can you just answer me how doing Angle vs. AJ what, 2, 3 times in a row, isn't being repetitive? How exactly were the matches different each time?

 

[AlreadyKnow]

I don't mind repetition at all, as long as the quality of the match is there. I want to see HBK/Taker again; they've put on nothing but excellent matches, and it's very doubtful this one will all of the sudden be crap. Cena/Batista is great; you have two of the biggest stars in the company going at it. Their match at SummerSlam from what I remember was a pretty fun match, and I again seriously doubt this will be as bad as something like Triple H/Orton.

Again, as long as the two guys put on good matches, I'll enjoy watching them 100 times.

 

[CuddleBuns84]

Well, obviously we are looking at an issue that WWE has struggled with for a long time now. And obviously, this leads to a lot of frustration amongst fans.

So WWE is left with two choices:

1) Acknowledge the problem and change the way you do business

2) Ignore the fans as long as you are making profits you are happy with, keep doing business the way you do assuming the fans will still watch regardless, and keep the Roster Split in tact.

It's rather obvious WWE has opted for the second approach to please the Audience of One.

WWE could easily solve this problem by combining the rosters and consistently developing new stars in Developmental and promoting them to the main roster.

Personally, I think WWE are trying to get more longetivity out of their stars and I don't know if that is a good thing in this day and age or not.

Maybe wrestlers (in a wrestling capacity) should only have a shelf life of maybe no longer than 10 years instead of this being around for 15-20 years concept since the fans do get tired of seeing the same people constantly.

If you can incorporate some of those guys into managers, broadcasters, etc. then perhaps that would spare some of these guys, but I really have to question shelf life of today's talents and if that is the main problem here.

Vince may be keeping guys around for just too long: like Undertaker, HBK, and Triple H.

Let's see here Sid, last night was one of the best Raws we've had since the guest host concept. The fans were crazy and nuts over that announcing of the matches at Wrestlemania. But you hate WWE too much you won't give it credit.

Cody Rhodes, Ted D., Kofi Kingston, Drew McEntrye, John Morrison's Push, The Miz, Luke Bowers, Ezekiel Jackson, Sheamus, and entire new show dedicated to young talent... You know Sid your right, that aren't developing any new talent.

Oh yea, that's right Sid, combine the two rosters, instead of having two shows. That will help the company. Ya know, since you would need two 4 hour shows to promote all that talent. Why have two brands, and two shows to promote talent. Let's do what WCW did, and just have a 3 hour cluster fuck of fun. GOLDBERG!!!!!

One of the things that wrestling promotions from big to small, they always have the same matches. It's going to happen. In fact some of the top talent in the world love working with the same guys over and over. Why is that? Because they produce a great product. Yea, seeing Cena and Orton a million times can get boring, but the matches get better and better every time. So the next time you see the two wrestle, it's even better then the last time. Would you rather see good matches every time, or a brand new crumby match every week or PPV? I'm still pissed off over Warrior vs. Hogan 2. But I wasn't too upset over Hogan vs. Flair again, in fact some of those matches got better over time.

Not also that, your a big TNA mark Sid, your complaining about how Michaels and Taker going longer then they are. Yet right now the biggest star on TNA and in charge of the company, is a guy who won't retire. HulK Hogan! Sid, your contradicting yourself!

Well Sid, go enjoy the rip off show you call TNA. You can feel good about yourself when you call yourself innovative.

 

[JJohns]

"If the Brand Split were to end, do you realize how many guys will be out of a job."

My responses to these two statements are who cares and so what. I hate to be so cold and callous, but I am sick and tired of the IWC looking at things from the perspective of the wrestlers or from the perspective of the wrestling promotions. WE ARE FANS. Our job is not to worry about wrestlers' employment, or the WWE bottom line, or even what's "best for the industry," although we do want it to do well overall. Our role in this whole game is that we want to be entertained. Or at least that should be our role.

First of all, when I say how many guys will be out of a job, I'm not just talking about wrestlers. I'm also talking about members of the ring crew that travel from show to show, road agents, writers, wardrobe people...all people under the WWE payroll, on top of that, less work for the people that WWE brings in from the different cities to help with the technical aspect of the show, the crews that they hire for the day that they need them to help set up the events and strike the sets at the end of the day.

I'm sorry, but I'm not looking at the perspective of a wrestler or a promoter, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a guy that realizes that there are more people involved in making the crazy world of World Wrestling Entertainment operate than just the "Wrestlers" and the "Promoters".

I'm looking at it from the perspective of being a resident of the state with the Worst Unemployment Rate in the US right now.

 

[The Ultimate]

ok, don't get mad at me, but i don't want to see, Cena against Batista again, because we have already seen it before, and I hate seeing matches repeated. But at the same time, I understand that there are not a lot of main eventers, and WWE is doing all they can to get money. Personally, I would love the original idea, of the tag team match Hart and Cena vs. Batista and McMahon. And we are also seeing HBK and Taker again this year. Why?! We saw that last year, that one match should be what the 25th anniversary of WM was all about. Now with this repeat, all the flair of the previous WM is gone... I don't know. Maybe I just like to complain, but hey, they can't make everyone happy...

 

[FromTheSouth]

ok, don't get mad at me, but i don't want to see, Cena against Batista again, because we have already seen it before, and I hate seeing matches repeated.

Why? Half of the roster has no right tying Cena's or Batista's shoes much less being in a match with them. I think it is just stupid to say matches shouldn't be repeated. The more guys work with each other, the more chemistry they get, and the better the matches. If we don't repeat matches, we get Batista vs. Evan Bourne for a world title, and Even Bourne barely deserves a fucking job, much less a title shot.

But at the same time, I understand that there are not a lot of main eventers, and WWE is doing all they can to get money. Personally, I would love the original idea, of the tag team match Hart and Cena vs. Batista and McMahon.

I think that match would have just plain sucked. I prefer to not see Bret Hart wrestle any more. He had a stroke and I don't think that he should be in the ring. This is where X says Tedy Bruschi....

Well, Bruschi was never the same after his stroke. It hurt to watch him at times, and I don't want to cringe and turn my head when Bret Hart gets into the ring. His brother already died in the ring.

And we are also seeing HBK and Taker again this year. Why?! We saw that last year, that one match should be what the 25th anniversary of WM was all about.

No it shouldn't. The 25th anniversary of Wrestlemania should have been a celebration of the WWE, just like every other Mania. There is no way in hell one or two guys should outshine the entire company on that night.

Now with this repeat, all the flair of the previous WM is gone...

That's not even remotely true. It was a great match, and it will always be a great match. It's not like if Taker botches this year, it will show up in the film of last year. Plus, wrestling is about the moment. How can you go back and take luster off of last year? That's just looking for something to bitch about. And, like the rest of your post, it fails.

I don't know. Maybe I just like to complain, but hey, they can't make everyone happy...

Not if they refuse to think before spewing garbage like this on all of us.

 

[WWE Manster03]

Anybody that can HONESTLY sit down and explain to me how WWE isn't doing something different right now with there main event picture will earn my upmost respect. Otherwise I tell the haters to get over it. Do you people that are complaining about them not pushing new guys up to the main event level even realize why they are afraid to? Yes I said AFRAID to push guys. Reason? I'll give you 2. Brock Lesnar Bobby Lashley. They put ALOT of time and effort into Brock Lesnar, put him against the best they had to offer and for a little while it worked out. Then their relationship soured and off he went. 2 years wasted. Bobby comes in and they booked him like a black Goldberg and put the ECW title on him, had him take part in a HUGE angle at Wrestlemania in terms of publicity, they put him on a big brand and he takes off for MMA training. More time wasted. Then you have people like Mr. Kennedy and Jeff Hardy, who will start to get a push and get hurt all the time or have trouble being a good boy. Do you remember who was SUPPOSED to be Vince's illegitimate son? Kennedy. He got busted for Roids and they gave that job to the midget. Jeff has been suspended I think 2 times in the middle of a pretty sizable push. That is why John Cena/HHH/HBK/Taker/Batista/Edge/Jericho have been in the main event picture for so long, because they are company guys that Vince can trust not to screw him. CM Punk is starting to get to that level as well, and Orton has proven himself worthy of that role as evidenced by the fat contract they just gave him. New guys are getting pushed just fine, but it's taking them a lot longer to earn Vince's trust than it used to in the past. If you are gonna blame anyone, blame those guys that screwed the main event picture for those 4 years or so.

 

[kennyv7]

You know, I would go as far as to say, I dont like this Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels rematch idea. I understand that its considered a great match and everything, but this is wrestlemania, it needs to be a really exciting card. If I felt confident it could be a better match that would be one thing, but I mean, taker is working through an injury right now, if I recall he wasnt last year. So how can we expect an injured version of him to do better than he did last year?

 

[Razor]

This is a problem of "Wah, why can't I see Benjamin wrestle Cena!!!!>!>!>!>!>"

People don't want matches repeated. Okay. That's fair. Orton/Triple H 5000 was annoying.

However, when you ask people "Okay, what match do you want instead of Cena/Batista II?" They say "Benjamin/Ortoniz."

People can't accept that there aren't that many people to make main event matches out of because main event matches have to sell PPVs. You can't stick Benjamin or Matt Hardy against Cena to sell a PPV. It won't happen. People don't care about either of those wrestlers, and won't buy a PPV to see Cena win a match in 4 minutes.

The brand split won't solve problems either. It'll just smash the main events together into one big clusterfuck. The mid-card won't even exist anymore.

The only thing that will fix this issue of people wanting new matches after literally ONE match has been made is for them to get patient. Or for mid-carders to suddenly get enough response to be main event in 3 months. And we know that won't ever happen.

 

[nwojeff]

First of all, when I say how many guys will be out of a job, I'm not just talking about wrestlers. I'm also talking about members of the ring crew that travel from show to show, road agents, writers, wardrobe people...all people under the WWE payroll, on top of that, less work for the people that WWE brings in from the different cities to help with the technical aspect of the show, the crews that they hire for the day that they need them to help set up the events and strike the sets at the end of the day.

I'm sorry, but I'm not looking at the perspective of a wrestler or a promoter, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a guy that realizes that there are more people involved in making the crazy world of World Wrestling Entertainment operate than just the "Wrestlers" and the "Promoters".

I'm looking at it from the perspective of being a resident of the state with the Worst Unemployment Rate in the US right now.

I completely understand your viewpoint, and I do sympathize with anyone that has lost a job because of the recession, including wrestling personnel.

However, the point I was trying to make in my first post was that we as fans should not really be concerned with the job security of any WWE employees, whether they be wrestlers, executives, road agents, writers, the ring crew, etc. I may sound selfish when I say this, but I want the best possible wrestling show with the highest quality of entertainment, regardless of who is working for the company or not.

Our job, if you want to call it that, is to sit back and be entertained, and speak out on forums like this and maybe even to the WWE itself when we think they could do a much better job of entertaining us, as most of us would agree that they could. Our job is not to worry about the livelihood of the employees or former employees of World Wrestling Entertainment. It's also not to view the wrestling business from the point of view of Vince McMahon, the writing staff, the talent and the other employees of WWE. We are fans and nothing more.

Now there may be some exceptions. Some of us like myself might own a wrestling blog or website or cover wrestling in some way. And if you don't own a site, everyone here at least shares their opinions on this forum. But that doesn't put any of us in a position to constantly worry about what's best for the WWE and its employees. Our only concern should be to consistently get the highest form of entertainment that the WWE is capable of providing. We know that they are capable of more based on the Hulkamania and Attitude Eras, so we critique and often complain on sites like this one often in the hopes that they can turn their product around, not so they will make more money or be able to hire more people, but merely to improve our level of enjoyment. That's the reason why I don't like your argument, which is shared by many others that I've talked to or seen online, that they can't end the brand split because of the jobs that will be lost.

If you wanted to make other arguments against ending the brand split, I'd be glad to hear them. There are definitely others, and some of them even cause me to consider if I'm taking the right stance on this subject, but I believe I am. I really think ending the brand split and recombining the titles is what's best for the wrestling fans. And in the long run, that would even make it good for business too. Would it be good for the people who lose their jobs as a result of having only one roster? Of course not, but they could work for other wrestling companies or get into a different line of work altogether. Again, as cold as this sounds, it's not really our problem.

I think my argument is really based around the survival of the fittest theory. The WWE could end the brand split and have the best 45-55 wrestlers they could possibly employ, along with the best road agents, writers, ring crew, commentators, etc. that they could possibly employ. This way, we'd get the best WWE product they are capable of giving us, rather than the watered down, bland product that we've gotten for the past 8 years. That's what you and I and all wrestling fans deserve, because we're the ones that spend our hard earned money on the WWE's pay per views, house shows and merchandise, and spend our time watching their TV shows. In return, we expect excellence, and with the brand split, we're simply not getting it.

 

[The Phenomenal One]

This is basically what many said about WM25. Hell, you even had some people saying "We already saw Undertaker vs. HBK"...even though the last time they wrestled, prior to WM25, was back in 98. The whole thing is beyond annoying. Nobody bitched and complained about all the damn Austin/Rock matches during the Attitude era. Oh yeah I forgot, b/c it's teh era of attitude...let's totally overlook all the same shit that many complain about today.

 

[The Phenomenal One]

yeh pple should complain! any1 thats sick of wwes repetitiveness! tna doesnt often do stuff more than once and when they do they make it interesting! theres more to it then just a rematch! for tha pple that wanna watch something over and over and over, instead of watching wwe each week, why don't u just record an episode and watch that a few times?

Oh please dude. TNA had AJ vs. Angle on iMPACT then had the SAME match at the January PPV, soon after. Then they had the match again on iMPACT following the PPV. That's just one example. I'm not hating on TNA for doing matches more than once. But to act as if they don't do that? Seriously dude, leave the TNA "smarky-ness" at the door.

 

[Checkmate]

I was just reading through the Cena/Batista WrestleMania thread, and most of the replies consisted of the poster saying that they weren't that excited about it because we have seen it before in varying levels of grammatical competency.

When I read this, I thought it was ridiculous to complain about this. WWE presents 3 brand new, nationally broadcasted wrestling programs every week, without even mentioning the PPVs. In order to keep fans happy, they need to put on entertaining matches and storylines throughout the year. With a roster that is only so big, even with guys moving around the card, there are only so many combinations that can be used. In fact, Jericho and Undertaker meeting for the first time after years in the company late last year has become the exception to the over-saturation that is the rule.

I'm not advocating for supporting the overdone feuds (Cena-Triple H, Orton-Triple H, etc.), but are we crazy for wanting/expecting brand new matches all the time?

Before I really begin, I think this is a great thread that everyone who visits the forums should at least read the OP from, and formulate some opinion in relation to their own viewing experience.

Now, on to my own opinions. Wrestling, that is sports-entertainment wrestling, is passed on to the audience as something "real". The element of kayfabe exists strictly for this purpose and attempts to keep the entire product as real as possible. I do not mean this as 100% real, as then gimmicks would be pointless, as would a script, but thus the title of sports-ENTERTAINMENT. We are meant to be entertained by the "real" actions of scripted wrestling. This is the product as it is presented. You will see why I feel this matters in a moment.

Wrestling, whether real or scripted, exists for the simple purpose of claiming superiority, be it over an individual (singles match), a group (tag), or over everyone in a certain jurisdiction (championship title). The simplest way to analyze wrestling would have to be a singles match, as it has the least amount of variables. In a typical singles bout, there is a winner and a loser. The winner is thus superior to the loser, based on the logic of the sport and competition. However, this concept is very loose, as under these rules no match would ever have to be repeated, as the result would be inevitable. It is in fact the little variables involved that matter most in sports-entertainment. We care not so much about the who (though it is a dominant factor), but the how and the why. Just because someone was victorious over someone else on one night does not mean the result will always be the same, and this is the true beauty of a rematch.

Rematches are and have been used to hype confrontations for ages. Simply, rematches are marketable. We already know that the two guys involved can perform together, and for some reason Wrestler A was the victor, but what about the second time around? Will Wrestler B be able to tie things up, or will Wrestler A defeat B again? If the first confrontation was even remotely close, or there is a visible sign of improvement from the losing side, then there is just cause for a rematch, as things indeed do change, and the result may be one of them.

Diving into specifics, many are referencing the Cena/Batista matchup to take place at Wrestlemania. These are two guys that are near equals in story. They came in at around the same time, were in developmental together, and rose to the top at the same Wrestlemania. Yet, they hardly were involved with each other, constantly bouncing to opposite shows or recovering from injury. I think they have more experience tagging TOGETHER as a team than having matches against each other in any form. Their first encounter was good, and left a bit to be desired. It also left Cena on the shelf with an injury supposedly sustained in the match itself, which brings the question of could a "fresh" Cena have won. Either way, a matchup between the two is definitely justified, as they not only have very few matchups between them (which means they only explored a fraction of the options possible) but they are also two of the biggest stars around, and should be showcased on the biggest stage possible.

One reason why so many may be opposed to this matchup is the fact that it has happened already, and while it hasn't been showcased to the degree of say Cena/Orton or Orton/Triple H, the overbooking of certain feuds has left many with a sour taste in their mouth. Feuds are supposed to be lengthy at times, but sometimes a trilogy of matchups is all it takes to prove a decisive winner. Exceptions are obvious, such as the Best of 5 and Best of 7 series, or even matchups that end in countout or disqualification. However, when the same two or three guys are facing each other for the sixth or seventh time without necessity, fans will eventually grow tired of the similarity and crave something fresh.

Another matchup mentioned is the Shawn Michaels/Undertaker rematch at Wrestlemania. This one is a bit different due to the context of the matchup. Michaels has indeed beaten the Undertaker before, but the Undertaker at Wrestlemania is almost like a completely different individual. Essentially, this matchup has only happened once, so a rematch could be warranted. I say "could" because of the matchup in itself. It was named match of the year, but many hold it in even higher regard, placing it in the top 5 or so Wreslemania (or even all time) matches. Some probably feel that due to this, the legacy of the match should be left alone and never repeated. That argument is certainly understandable, as no one wants to tarnish a gem. However, in my eyes the key to any rematch is the ability for the loser to win. As HBK stated monday night on RAW, "I made one mistake", the implication being that had that one mistake not been made, he could have won. This is the entire point of a rematch, and should happen if enough people deem it worthy.

A final reason to look at a rematch is time. How much time has passed since the individuals have faced each other. The Wrestlemania 24 intro has the saying "A lot can happen in a year" and this is very true. This is also the amount of time that has passed since Taker and HBK have faced each other. Cena and Batista haven't met since Summerslam 2008 (I don't count the 1 minute massacre at Elimination Chamber). I think this more than qualifies the idea of a rematch in either case, as both rivalries are relatively fresh and have yet to play out to their full potential.

 

[JackBurton]

To be totally honest (and some might say brutal) If you are one the people planning on buying this PPV - or going to It, then you should thank your lucky stars that this match is booked. Having looked at the card as It looks at the moment this match looks as though It might be another "If it wasn't for Taker vs HBK" situation - like last years Mania.

Don't look a gift horse In the mouth

 

[The Phenomenal One]

To be totally honest (and some might say brutal) If you are one the people planning on buying this PPV - or going to It, then you should thank your lucky stars that this match is booked. Having looked at the card as It looks at the moment this match looks as though It might be another "If it wasn't for Taker vs HBK" situation - like last years Mania.

Don't look a gift horse In the mouth

I know I'm probably in the minority here, but still feel that WM25 is in the category of "underrated". The only match that night that truly had me rockin the "WTF" facial expression, was the main event. Damn good build up, but a horrible match that could've been saved with some interference, heel turns, or something. With WM26, I feel that it has huge potential to be a damn good event. So far, I'm loving the card. I'm looking forward to the event. LOL hopefully WWE doesn't screw anything up.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Let's see here Sid, last night was one of the best Raws we've had since the guest host concept. The fans were crazy and nuts over that announcing of the matches at Wrestlemania. But you hate WWE too much you won't give it credit.

I've supported WWE since 1990. I have supported the company rather blindly all the way until 2006 when the PG Era began. I won't do it anymore and nor will I support ANY company blindly anymore.

I have given the WWE credit when it does well. Unfortunately, it doesn't do "well" often in the Creative department by my standards, so you don't see regular compliments from me. However, if you check out some of the discussions on Michael Cole in my post history, you will see that I gave them credit for turning their announcing style around from the failed experiment of Face/Analyst commentary that Mr. McMahon enacted.

The compliments are out there ... however only when they do something right. I am not going to blindly support anything and everything the company does like you may.

Cody Rhodes, Ted D., Kofi Kingston, Drew McEntrye, John Morrison's Push, The Miz, Luke Bowers, Ezekiel Jackson, Sheamus, and entire new show dedicated to young talent... You know Sid your right, that aren't developing any new talent.

Where was all of this new talent being developed the past several years?

And a better question, "how many "new" talents have made it into the WWE Main Event scene since the year 2004"?

Oh yea, that's right Sid, combine the two rosters, instead of having two shows. That will help the company.

I said to combine the rosters, and STILL have two shows. Learn how to read.

Ya know, since you would need two 4 hour shows to promote all that talent. Why have two brands, and two shows to promote talent. Let's do what WCW did, and just have a 3 hour cluster fuck of fun. GOLDBERG!!!!!

You are a moron. The shows are stretched entirely too thin as it is, and that is why you have so many people complaining about stale matches. Combine the rosters, and this opens up a whole new world of possibilities, which freshens up ALL areas of the roster.

Like I said, I don't care which option is chosen:

1) Keep the rosters separate, but develop MORE talent in greater numbers on a regular basis.

2) Develop performers at a slow pace, but COMBINE the rosters.



Either one will help alleviate the problem. Better than sitting on your lazy ass and doing nothing about it, wouldn't you say?

One of the things that wrestling promotions from big to small, they always have the same matches. It's going to happen. In fact some of the top talent in the world love working with the same guys over and over. Why is that? Because they produce a great product. Yea, seeing Cena and Orton a million times can get boring, but the matches get better and better every time.

I don't give a shit how many matches they put on, and nor do I care about how better they get every time. That is the disconnect fans like you have with casual fans, and that is why I myself put myself in the mindset of a casual fan.

I understand your perspective and the perspective of newer fans, but I don't embrace the ideologies of the wrestling product that you embrace.


I like constantly seeing new things that are fresh and unpredictable.

I would take seeing weekly television filled with mostly jobber matches, that actually hype up feuds between two guys for the big PPV .... as opposed to seeing them wrestle for free on weekly TV and wrestle AGAIN on PPV.

Good matches are great. But having a better orchestrated feud and storyline is even better.

More interesting characters that can wrestle average are a higher priority for me than bland characters that can wrestle 5 star matches.

So the next time you see the two wrestle, it's even better then the last time.

I don't give a shit about that. I want a constant influx of new, fresh feuds in which two wrestlers are separated from wrestling each other until the big match on PPV.

And that is why the fans like you, which I call the ROH bots have it all wrong. You do not understand the mentality of casual fans.

Would you rather see good matches every time, or a brand new crumby match every week or PPV?

The matches themselves are less important than the quality of feud/storyline.

Not also that, your a big TNA mark Sid, your complaining about how Michaels and Taker going longer then they are. Yet right now the biggest star on TNA and in charge of the company, is a guy who won't retire. HulK Hogan! Sid, your contradicting yourself!

No, I'm not contradicting myself. You simply are illiterate. These were my words:

Maybe wrestlers (in a wrestling capacity) should only have a shelf life of maybe no longer than 10 years instead of this being around for 15-20 years concept since the fans do get tired of seeing the same people constantly.

If you can incorporate some of those guys into managers, broadcasters, etc. then perhaps that would spare some of these guys, but I really have to question shelf life of today's talents and if that is the main problem here.

Well Sid, go enjoy the rip off show you call TNA. You can feel good about yourself when you call yourself innovative.

Ripoff show? How so? TNA has the same writer at its disposal that WWE did during it's most popular period. If anything, that is his product, as he was in charge and gave McMahon a new vision for the company.

Since then Vince has abandoned it, and instead, WWE is actually more like WCW during its most popular period, with the toned down, family-friendly garbage. Except WWE today is by far a more Kids-oriented product than WCW was during that particular time.

So be happy in sitting yourself down and watching a product geared towards little children. Tell me, Cuddlebuns, do you still watch Raw with your Teddybear?

 

[FromTheSouth]

This is a problem of "Wah, why can't I see Benjamin wrestle Cena!!!!>!>!>!>!>"

People don't want matches repeated. Okay. That's fair. Orton/Triple H 5000 was annoying.

No, it wasn't. Orton/HHH 5000 was awesome. You must be referring to Orton/HHH 4992 which was short, but still passable.

Honestly though, I would rather see Orton/HHH 10000 than Evan Bourne vs. Matt Hardy for the WWE Title. There is a limited pool of people worthy of being on PPV, and an even more limited pool of those who deserve to main event.

However, when you ask people "Okay, what match do you want instead of Cena/Batista II?" They say "Benjamin/Ortoniz."

People can't accept that there aren't that many people to make main event matches out of because main event matches have to sell PPVs. You can't stick Benjamin or Matt Hardy against Cena to sell a PPV. It won't happen. People don't care about either of those wrestlers, and won't buy a PPV to see Cena win a match in 4 minutes.

Exactly right.

The brand split won't solve problems either. It'll just smash the main events together into one big clusterfuck. The mid-card won't even exist anymore.

I disagree here. If you end the brandsplit, the midcard becomes Punk vs. Cena for the US Title. Does that not make the title more important? Wouldn't a PPV with a card that featured Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston as the opener be a lot better than one where we are forced to see the Harts or other talentless hacks? Ending the brandsplit would allow for the rosters to be purged. No more Bourne, no more Finlay, no more Knox polluting our televisions with unentertaining bullshit. The problem with WWE isn't that not enough people get TV time, it's that too many people get TV time.

The only thing that will fix this issue of people wanting new matches after literally ONE match has been made is for them to get patient. Or for mid-carders to suddenly get enough response to be main event in 3 months. And we know that won't ever happen.

The only issue here is that the IWC is a bunch of whiny motherfuckers who throw a collective hissyfit any time a Bingo Hall Superstar is passed over for someone the audience actually give a fuck about.