Crimson's Undefeated Streak

[HiddenInPlainView]

I understand that they are trying to build this guy up by using the undefeated streak, but does it need to be announced before matches? They don't announce anyone else's win-loss record before a match so why this guy?

 

[Dizzy]

Because you have new viewers and old viewers that could tune in and not know the significance of what Crimson is doing.

Goldberg's streak was always announced. They would actually say the number of people he "destroyed"

 

[Zeven_Zion]

Crimson's streak is his badge of honor. It's his thing, just like The X-Division Champion's "thing" is being just that. That's why they announce it. It's a crucial part of Crimson's character, it is Crimson's character, it defines him so they announce it. They make it out to be a big deal which it really isn't but that's pro wrestling for you - overhyping things we've seen a gazillion times before. Plus, like Dizzy said, it's a good way to let new viewers (all three of them) that this guy is undefeated. Might give them a reason to stick around instead of changing the channel and see why this undefeated ginger is undefeated. Nothing wrong with it.

 

[mayankeagle]

All undefeated streaks, except the Undertaker's, are meant to be broken. Its only a matter of time before this breaks.

 

[Skairipa Matrix]

seriously? are you really asking why they announce hes undefeated when he comes out? thats his gimmick (even though hes not undefeated him and steiner did lose a 4 way cage match to ink inc with the british invansion and EY & orlando jordan in the match as well) and it makes the casual viewers wanna stay tuned in and see why hes undefeated and for the haters of him hope to see him lose and vice versa with the crimson fans they wanna see him keep the steak alive

 

[Azane]

So that you know you can go to the bathroom or get a drink because he's not losing until it's a PPV or a major rivalry.
That's what the inner smark at me says when I hear these streaks being announced.

It's just the announcers setup, since they're as much a part of the wrestling story as the in ring performers.

 

[GameOver]

seriously? are you really asking why they announce hes undefeated when he comes out? thats his gimmick (even though hes not undefeated him and steiner did lose a 4 way cage match to ink inc with the british invansion and EY & orlando jordan in the match as well) and it makes the casual viewers wanna stay tuned in and see why hes undefeated and for the haters of him hope to see him lose and vice versa with the crimson fans they wanna see him keep the steak alive

He's still undefeated one on one, which is all that matters. Tag matches have nothing to do with it

I seem to recall Samoa Joe had the same deal, every match they talked about him being undefeated, It's nothing new, as others said, it's his gimmick atm, once he loses they'll talk about his win streak for a while then it'll be dropped and he'll fade into obscurity

 

[PompeyDJ]

He's still undefeated one on one, which is all that matters. Tag matches have nothing to do with it

I seem to recall Samoa Joe had the same deal, every match they talked about him being undefeated, It's nothing new, as others said, it's his gimmick atm, once he loses they'll talk about his win streak for a while then it'll be dropped and he'll fade into obscurity

also, i seem to recall that crimson wasn't even the one pinned so the tag match really shouldn't count

back to the topic, it's the man's gimmick, he needs to be built up to be a legitimate threat. it adds an extra edge to his matches. rather than "oh look, here's crimson" it's "here's crimson who is currently undefeated". this streak is building him up to be impact's next big star and who ever ends it will receive a large push from it

 

[Sub-Xero]

So is it just me, or does nobody like Crimson? Personally I think he's a good young talent, however, he doesn't really have a bankable gimmick right now. The name and look are ok, but there's no back story, so he has to hang his hat on being undefeated in singles competition. Give it time, once he loses, they'll put him into some rediculous program where he'll obtain some sort of new secondary monicker like, "the unstable" or "the tenacoius" or some other character trait they can TRY to make money off of.

 

[Rayne]

Crimson is being pushed in the exact same manner as Goldberg; the difference is, no one really gives a shit about Crimson. There's no fan investment in his 'streak'; if he were to lose next week, is there anyone who can honestly say they'd be upset, whether he was beaten through fair means or foul?

Goldberg finally had his streak beaten after Scott Hall cattle prodded him, allowing Kevin Nash to pick up the win. Fans were outraged, because Goldberg's streak had been allowed to grow organically, and fans had become invested in it. The fans noticed Goldberg was undefeated before WCW started hyping it, which is smart booking. Crimson was almost immediately pushed as undefeated when people were still trying to figure out who he was. Goldberg was a hot commodity, destroying opponents which a wrestler of his political stature had no reason to be beating under normal booking. Crimson is being pushed as a mid-card wrestler who has been pulling out of narrow scrape after narrow scrape.

It's the symptom of these down times in professional wrestling; the televised companies have lost so much faith in their ability to build ratings over time that they're simply trying to tell people what's hot, instead of making them believe it's hot. Crimson's streak will be broken, of course, and he'll slide into a mid-card slot, probably to be released in a couple of years once he's been bled out of everything he has to offer. TNA/IW is trying to recreate the magic of Goldberg's streak, and they're trying to do it the quick and cheap way. By now, they should have noticed that it's just not gonna happen.

 

[mrbooker]

Crimson is being pushed in the exact same manner as Goldberg; the difference is, no one really gives a shit about Crimson. There's no fan investment in his 'streak'; if he were to lose next week, is there anyone who can honestly say they'd be upset, whether he was beaten through fair means or foul?

Goldberg finally had his streak beaten after Scott Hall cattle prodded him, allowing Kevin Nash to pick up the win. Fans were outraged, because Goldberg's streak had been allowed to grow organically, and fans had become invested in it. The fans noticed Goldberg was undefeated before WCW started hyping it, which is smart booking. Crimson was almost immediately pushed as undefeated when people were still trying to figure out who he was. Goldberg was a hot commodity, destroying opponents which a wrestler of his political stature had no reason to be beating under normal booking. Crimson is being pushed as a mid-card wrestler who has been pulling out of narrow scrape after narrow scrape.
.

So what you are saying is that ITS NOTHING LIKE GOLDBERG people always want to compare tna to wcw, you basically said its just like goldberg except for the fact that goldberg streak was longer, against better competition, and he dominated and crimson does not..... well that makes it totally and completly different it actually made it the exact opposite, crimson is booked as a young big guy and we are waiting to see when he will meet his match as we have seen people come close to beating him.

Goldberg was and older guy who was built rather quickly and it seemed no one would ever beat him, he was built as an unstoppable force that would blow past everyone with high impact moves.

Its nothing like crimson at all goldberg was about who was next on the streak, crimson is more about who is going to beat him

 

[Rayne]

So what you are saying is that ITS NOTHING LIKE GOLDBERG people always want to compare tna to wcw, you basically said its just like goldberg except for the fact that goldberg streak was longer, against better competition, and he dominated and crimson does not..... well that makes it totally and completly different it actually made it the exact opposite, crimson is booked as a young big guy and we are waiting to see when he will meet his match as we have seen people come close to beating him.

Goldberg was and older guy who was built rather quickly and it seemed no one would ever beat him, he was built as an unstoppable force that would blow past everyone with high impact moves.

Yes. In the sense that Goldberg's streak gimmick was successful and Crimson's has not been, they are completely different. Can't argue with that.

The "new wrestler goes on an unbeaten tear over months" gimmick has been tried twice on television in the past 25 years, so it's kind of a given that people are going to compare the two.

Its nothing like crimson at all goldberg was about who was next on the streak, crimson is more about who is going to beat him

And the significance of that minor difference is............ what, exactly? Semantics?

 

[Pedigree1]

If this undefeated streak doesnt remind me of goldberg i dont know what does.. As far as announcing him being undefeated goes i guess its crimson badge of honor. But no one gives a shit about this i know i dont!! IMO i really dont care about crimson at all... Sure hes a good young talent but hes missing something i feel he doesnt have that it factor you know. The streak will end and he will disappear into mid-card hell

 

[mrbooker]

its not semantics its called booking... crimsons has not been booked like goldberg at all he isnt having guys job every single night and crushing them effortlessly,

champions and proven stars on the roster arent losing to crimsons in 6 minute matches 1vs 1 and televised programming where goldberg matches on nitro typically never went over 10 minutes,

any match crimson is in their is always a back and fourth battle not squash matches.

the streak mattered because of who goldberg beat and how he beat them, its the same reason bobby lashley's streak wasnt a big deal, and why crimsons isn't because of the booking if goldberg would have struggled with guys like wrath, mortis, raven, mid card guys he would have never maintained steam to go against guys like sting, dpp, nash, hogan etc Goldberg booking went all in lashley and crimson they didnt and thats a huge difference its the difference between what a push is(goldberg) and trying to get over(crimson)

 

[Rayne]

its not semantics its called booking... crimsons has not been booked like goldberg at all he isnt having guys job every single night and crushing them effortlessly,

champions and proven stars on the roster arent losing to crimsons in 6 minute matches 1vs 1 and televised programming where goldberg matches on nitro typically never went over 10 minutes,

any match crimson is in their is always a back and fourth battle not squash matches.

the streak mattered because of who goldberg beat and how he beat them, its the same reason bobby lashley's streak wasnt a big deal, and why crimsons isn't because of the booking if goldberg would have struggled with guys like wrath, mortis, raven, mid card guys he would have never maintained steam to go against guys like sting, dpp, nash, hogan etc Goldberg booking went all in lashley and crimson they didnt and thats a huge difference its the difference between what a push is(goldberg) and trying to get over(crimson)

So seriously, what's your point? That they aren't exactly the same to the individual detail, and because they aren't exactly the same to the individual detail, there can't be any basis for comparison? Yes, he hasn't been booked exactly like Goldberg. He's been booked very, very similarly to Goldberg. So his matches are closer; how does that matter in the end? Because his streak can be perceived as weaker and less effective than Goldberg's? I thought that was made pretty clear in my first and second posts, that Goldberg's streak got fans invested while people won't care after Crimson's ends.

A Granny Smith apple is not the same as a Red Delicious apple. They are both, however, apples.

PS- There is absolutely no difference between a "push" and "trying to get over", they are different names for exactly the same process.

 

[TheAwesome_RedX]

like many have said b4 they announce it to often atleast he big enough and look the part of an undefeated person i still think he should get the tv title and be that guy thats just not undefeated but is a undefeated champion like low ki and the x division title if im not correct

 

[Cebeards]

Wow, you guys are really gettin' mad about this....

Crimson is kind of a dry, boring character. Why couldn't they find Nathan Jones to have this streak? At least he scares me.

Joe's Undefeated streak was awesome, I enjoyed it, good job TNA

If It wasn't for drug's, Sin Cara would still be on his undefeated streak and I would be well more invested in it

Goldberg was destructive Jesus, no one will touch that kind of streak with that kind of improtance ever again....so disregard, it's pointless to compare in this situation or maybe any situation.

Crimson is working for a company that doesn't seem to understand booking and discards and recycles story lines constantly, it's like asking for cohesive story telling from a meth addicted golden retriever, your gonna get a show, but for the most part it won't make much sense.

Crimson's push has come nowhere near fruition so there isn't a way to effectively rate it yet. So far? It's dry and uneventful, I don't feel like it is a reason to pay to much attention, I watch his matches based on who he is facing, not him. If they wanted to make this streak effective then they should have gave him Abysses last job of destroying X Division guys...but I digress...

Push?...so far uneffective as a story, I doubt anyone would put much attention into him losing, but we will see? Before you get too excited just remember; win streaks are meant for Bald Monsters and Deadmen, not Gingertron.

 

[Dizzy]

Wait, so being a "ginger" is the problem? Well, where was that when Sheamus was undefeated on ECW and then 1 week later main eventing against Cena?

Kozlov was undefeated. Did he has a great personality? No. Did it stop him from main eventing? No.

You really are gonna complain about booking and recycling then bring up SIN CARA'S streak? Seriously?

Fact is, TNA does something interesting with a talent they like that has extreme potential and it has to be criticized. When I've done nothing but watch footage of Goldberg's streak and It's NOTHING compared to Crimson. It's not a carbon copy.

In terms of his personalty? Who besides Batista had a personality? Lesnar didn't, Goldberg didn't, Nathan Jones didn't.

 

[HiddenInPlainView]

I think i'm just perlexed because i don't really see much in Crimson. I think it annoys me because they don't say anyone else's win-loss record. It is the same way that ESPN annoys me with Tiger Woods. No matter what place Tiger is in they show his score. They give you the top 5 and then in 78th place is Tiger. I wanna hear a guy like Chavo who has jobbed for years come out with the announcer saying "....and with a record of 158 wins to 932 losses....CHAVO GUERRERO!!!"

 

[Wrath]

Undefeated streak angles don't work these days anymore just like it worked with Goldberg is because this angle is overdone dozen times with overhype that is not needed. It just lost it's credibility everyone knows that the streak will be broken one way or another. So no one cares it. If you want that kind of an angle work. It should be a long term deal and you should be booked as untouchable. Even against main eventers you should be someone that is feared by everyone. In short words you should make people believe you're one hard sob to be beat. In order to do that you should need a long and slowly build up without over hyping about your streak.