Is RVD's title reign suffering from it's random start?

[a0161613]

I remember when I read the spoilers about RVD's title win. It came on the back of the Raw crew being stuck in Europe because of the volcano.

Since joining TNA, he had been on a roll, booked strongly in all his matches and on a winning streak.

But I felt that the way he won the belt could have been so much better. Sure, they tried to make it seem like a big thing, with Hogan and the confetti. But it felt too random to me. Like they had to take the gamble.

It seems unnecessary then. AJ came off as weak after a strong showing against Pope at Lockdown and it didnt really seem like RVD truly earned it. Sure he had won four matches in two nights but did a win in Lethal Lockdown (the most obvious and poorly booked ever) really mean that he deserved a title match?

So is TNA's hotch-potch, shock-factor booking holding back their champion? Has his PPV win against AJ(and a likely defense against Sting) made him look more credible? Did he need this credibilty?

And finally, do you think RVD needed to be champion? Should it have happened on a bigger stage? What does he need to have in order to get momentum to help carry the brand forward?

Lots of questions, but the point is to avoid spamming up the thread and discuss RVD's reign so far...

 

[Coco]

We're about two months into RVD's title reign, complete with successful title defenses over AJ Styles and Desmond Wolfe and a major win in a fatal four way. If you're somehow implying that winning the belt in a swerve on a live show is still hurting him, as though it ever was, then you're sorely mistaken.

Has AJ looked weak? Sure. That is, if you're such a mark for Styles that you think his loss somehow negates the fact that he's the longest reigning TNA World Champion to date.

A huge name winning the belt out of nowhere on live TV was a gamble to make TNA's Monday show a must-see ordeal. It didn't pan out like they'd have hoped, but the company has suffered no more than normal under Van Dam's reign. It wasn't the wrong move.

Van Dam beat Hardy and Sting and won Lethal LockDown before winning the World Championship. He's never looked bad as champion and to imply otherwise is senseless.

I'm not seeing he point to this thread. At all.

 

[a0161613]

We're about two months into RVD's title reign, complete with successful title defenses over AJ Styles and Desmond Wolfe and a major win in a fatal four way. If you're somehow implying that winning the belt in a swerve on a live show is still hurting him, as though it ever was, then you're sorely mistaken.

The Wolfe win was a squash that served a purpose for the rankings thing and the four way was a given because the Slammiversary main event had already been announced. I didn't say it was hurting him, moreso his title reign. A swerve win would have benefitted a heel win, not a face of RVD's stature.

I think that if TNA had booked a RVD win over AJ with some build, like a quest for revenge, then his title reign would have had instant momentum.

Has AJ looked weak?

For a short time, he looked pathetic. He started his reign brilliantly and only recently is he getting his flow back.

Sure. That is, if you're such a mark for Styles that you think his loss somehow negates the fact that he's the longest reigning TNA World Champion to date.

Yes I am, you got me, but you're avoiding the point of the thread. See above, AJ's reign was great for the most part but I'm talking about RVD.

If you wanted to compare the two, AJ's reign came out of nowhere but built slowly and was fantastic for the last three months of 2009 and the first month of 2010.

A huge name winning the belt out of nowhere on live TV was a gamble to make TNA's Monday show a must-see ordeal. It didn't pan out like they'd have hoped, but the company has suffered no more than normal under Van Dam's reign. It wasn't the wrong move.

My point exactly.

Van Dam beat Hardy and Sting and won Lethal LockDown before winning the World Championship. He's never looked bad as champion and to imply otherwise is senseless.

You claim RVD had wins gives him momentum. I disagree, because his wins were nothing of significance. The number one contenders match came out of nowhere. Lethal Lockdown was painfully obvious and the Sting match was so pointless and irrelevant that I can't believe you brought it up.

I dont feel he earned the title shot in the same way Pope did. Or like Angle will most likely. If he had been through some sort of ordeal to earn his shot then I doubt he would need the momentum because the prior feud would have given it. Pope had it. Daniels, Joe and Angle all had it.

It's simple, wait three weeks until Sacrifice. Have RVD beat Hardy but then have AJ screw RVD out of that main event. Hulk gives RVD his title shot on pay per view there and then and bang, that is your build.

I think it was a risk TNA took. RVD isnt a risk in himself as champion, but it was so random and the pay off hasn't happened, that it wasn't completely worth the gamble.

I'm not seeing he point to this thread. At all.

What. A. Surprise.

 

[Coco]

The Wolfe win was a squash that served a purpose for the rankings thing and the four way was a given because the Slammiversary main event had already been announced. I didn't say it was hurting him, moreso his title reign.

Okay. Want to explain how two months of television have been directly hurt by the nature of his win?

I know everything is ass-backwards in TNA, but this is a bit of a stretch.

A swerve win would have benefitted a heel win, not a face of RVD's stature.

Considering RVD earned it with a clean win over Styles and another top contender, I'm not buying that this was bad for his face status. Considering he's still the most over face in the company, I know I'm right regarding this.

The swerve was to send the belt to a name in an attempt to get people watching the show every week. Considering the only heel of name value in the company is Flair, Van Dam or Hardy were the only real options to give the belt to. And considering Van Dam's face heat hasn't faltered, it's not like you have a point regarding how this would have been better for a heel.

Why does it matter that a face was put in this situation?

I think that if TNA had booked a RVD win over AJ with some build, like a quest for revenge, then his title reign would have had instant momentum.

The point was to avoid a build to see if the surprise would capture a larger audience. Your entire line of thinking runs counter to the entire reason the gave Van Dam the belt.

Yes I am, you got me, but you're avoiding the point of the thread. See above, AJ's reign was great for the most part but I'm talking about RVD.

You mentioned how weak AJ came off in the OP. You're wrong, considering all I hear from Taz in the booth is that AJ is the longest reigning TNA champion ever or the former champion. The loss didn't hurt AJ at all.

My point exactly.

It still wasn't the wrong move. It was a gamble. It not working didn't hurt the company in any way and was the right chance to take.

You claim RVD had wins gives him momentum. I disagree, because his wins were nothing of significance. The number one contenders match came out of nowhere. Lethal Lockdown was painfully obvious and the Sting match was so pointless and irrelevant that I can't believe you brought it up.

Everyone was chatting about the Sting match the day after, Lethal LockDown closed a PPV, and Hardy was the most popular wrestler of last year. Couple all of that with the momentum Van Dam still had from his debut, and I fail to see what's wrong with this booking. Sure, it wasn't an epic six month chase or a tournament win. But predending everything has to be takes away that element of surprise that is needed once in a while. Was another month or two of build going to get Van Dam any more over or create any more buzz? No. Van Dam was already viewed as one of the biggest deals in the company from day one. Maybe even before he ever showed up on TV.

Was the alternative gamble worth a shot? Yes. End of story.

I dont feel he earned the title shot in the same way Pope did. Or like Angle will most likely. If he had been through some sort of ordeal to earn his shot then I doubt he would need the momentum because the prior feud would have given it. Pope had it. Daniels, Joe and Angle all had it.

Joe and Daniels both lost their BFG matches but got shots while Angle had a legitimate claim to the top contender spot. It's not exactly like their builds were tip top.

It's simple, wait three weeks until Sacrifice. Have RVD beat Hardy but then have AJ screw RVD out of that main event. Hulk gives RVD his title shot on pay per view there and then and bang, that is your build.

That negates the risk the company (correctly) decided to take. Pointless.

I think it was a risk TNA took. RVD isnt a risk in himself as champion, but it was so random and the pay off hasn't happened, that it wasn't completely worth the gamble.

It wouldn't be worth the gamble if it had hurt business. But they're in the same position they were in since before Van Dam's reign. Considering it cost them nothing, it was a Hail Mary worth taking.

 

[a0161613]

I'm not going to pick your post apart Coco, but it has been fun. I just feel that if RVD's run as champ is still faltering and is not quite as good as it should or could have been. I don't think he is a bad champ and it could be a lot worse but RVD is good enough and deserves better.

I feel that had there been some real build to the title change, it would have had more impact and as a result, more people would care about him being champ. The swerve has not done it for me and in my eyes, RVD's reign started on the back foot because of that.

A good match against Sting tonight would help. I'm not sure I trust TNA to make it happen though.

 

[Coco]

If one's underwhelmed by Van Dam's title reign up to this point, it should probably be put on TNA's general inability to book anything properly for a significant period of time. Blame it on the pointless three-ways, four-ways, and tag matches he's been placed in. Blame it on Sting and other being a bigger part of the show than him. But to blame his "faltering" reign on one of the hottest starts to a title reign TNA's had in years, if not ever had, seems nonsensical to me. I don't think the last two months of television can be blamed on that one night.

 

[a0161613]

I think that's it. The events of RVD's reign since that night has not helped at all. It's only devaluing the title. No one is being built to be a real threat and when threats are posed (ie, Sting) then reasons are not fully developed on TV.

Just because I don't like how the title changed hands, it doesn't change the fact that since that, the company has failed to capitalise on any momentum or the wow factor that the title switch may have given them.

 

[TheAnimal]

His win was basically a ratings spike attempt so we never had the build and the story to get behind him. I think they hoped he was over enough anyway to negate the need for it. To an extent they are right, but in other ways they could be seen as being wrong.
Good reigns have to be built, i think TNA are in that mode where they are too cautious about giving you too much on free TV sometimes, so it seems like his reign has been a bit disappointing but maybe they are trying to save the big matches for PPV.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

I don't know why they gave him the title...it's not good booking because they are giving him a random wrestler to fight with for a month...because of the ranking system...without it, his reign would be more meaningful...and really stand out the tna title...