NO more squash matches!

[RatedRFan]

arent we all tired of raws constant squash matches? whens the last time you watched a match and didnt have a pretty clear cut idea of who was gonna win? or even a competitive match?


like this week we had...

"trips" weightlifting buddy sheamus (geez, how'd he get a push?) beating up a nobody,

randy orton beating "the world strongest man with the worlds weakest moveset"

chavo getting punked by hatton (celeb over wrestler again, geez i thought the wwe was supossed to have the top athletes around) hatton aint any geek offf the street though


the only match that was suprising was the evan bourne/swagger match that was a sqaush, that was saved by the miz

there was another jeri-show/dx match, wow never seen that before!


do i have a point? wouldn't everyone like to a see a great match between two equal opponents, with nearfalls, false finishes, and over a great back and forth pace? or would you like to see more hornswaggle/ ricky fatton?


whats your take on this?

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I'm going to have to throw out my challenge flag on this one.

Rated R, what positives do you see coming out of eliminating squash matches from the broadcasts? Quite obviously you feel as though you would get better matches on Raw, Smackdown, and ECW .... however do you feel as though this in some way may be detrimental to the PPV's?

The more marquee matches you put on free TV, the less of a chance you have of actually seeing new and unique matches for the BIG events that people will soon be paying $45 for. I personally think for this reason, and preserving the integrity of novelty matches on PPV's, that the squash matches are needed.

We have seen the same matches done over, and over, and over again ... and eventually, I think people get bored with that stuff. At least the concept of the squash match allows performers to get TV time, allows performers to get over with the audience as a threat ... and prolongs wrestlers from meeting against one another in the ring.

Do you not see a problem there ... or do you not think people mind seeing John Cena vs Randy Orton .... or Triple H vs Randy Orton .... or John Cena vs Edge plastered all over the weekly shows + the PPV's, 30 times a year?

 

[pyrusane]

I remember watching matches as a kid, and back then the WWF (as it was called then) had true jobbers on the roster. These were guys who weren't even classified as a heel or a face, the only purpose they served was to get squashed in a match. One week, you would see Iron Mike Sharpe get demolished by Hacksaw Jim Duggan, the following week he gets crushed by the Big Bossman. These were true squashes, to the point that I once saw Barry Horowitz land a punch and was truly shocked. It was the first offensive move I had seen him perform in perhaps twenty or thirty matches. Horowitz was one of the few that ever actually eventually got a push, as the Brooklyn Brawler, but most of these guys were simply there to lose. Bobby Heenan called them ham-and-eggers, and for the longest time I thought that that was actually their job title. (I was kinda dumb as a kid).

The point of that is this; squash matches today are very different from the 80s. For example, when Sheamus comes out and squashes Jamie Noble, its not just some ham-and-egger he's destroying. He is squashing a guy who is a former Cruiserweight champion, as well as a former ROH world champion. He is a squashing a guy who has had a semi-successful career in the past. Orton squashed a former dominate ECW champion, who is in the midst of a decent tag-team push. There are no guys who are out there solely to lose, although at times it does seem that way.

When a mid-card guy squashes an absolute nobody, it does very little for either of them, especially in the old days when the nobody got in zero offense. All it showed was that the midcarder could destroy someone that probably shouldn't be in the ring anyway. When a guy getting a push now squashes a proven performer, someone who has demonstrated that they do indeed have ability in the ring, then, if done correctly, it should both build the aggressor's credibility as a serious threat while simultaneously creating sympathy for the guy getting squashed. If nothing else, and again this is if it is done correctly, the other guy can now play the underdog card, making the wins they do get mean that much more.

The exception to this, of course, is anytime a former champion gets squashed by a midget/leprechaun. That is an example of doing things the wrong way...

 

[PEP3]

Horowitz was one of the few that ever actually eventually got a push, as the Brooklyn Brawler, but most of these guys were simply there to lose.

Actually, Pyrusane, The Brooklyn Brawler was Steve Lombardi. He was also a "ham-and-egger." WWF did give Horowitz a tiny storyline push once when he upset someone on WWF TV and Jim Ross screamed, "Horowitz wins! Horowitz wins! Horowitz wins!"

I'm glad I'm not the only one to remember the days of the true WWF squash matches. In another thread, I posted a list of people I remember being jobbers in WWF back then. I even divided them into "tiers," with the bottom rung being the nameless local wrestlers who got squashed in seconds by the main-event guys. Let me give it another go here.

Tier 1 - No-name local jobbers

Tier 2 - "Iron" Mike Sharpe, Steve Lombardi (The Brooklyn Brawler), Barry O, Barry Horowitz, "Playboy" Buddy Rose, "Leapin'" Lanny Poffo, Jumpin' Jim Brunzell, The Conquistadors

Tier 3 - (Former WWF title holders, mostly tag champs, reduced to jobbers) Afa/Sika, The Wild Samoans; Moondog Rex, Moondog Spot, Tony Garea, Repo Man

Frequently WWF would put guys from Tiers 2 & 3 into TV matches with guys from Tier 1 (no-name ham & eggers) to give them a couple victories, then feed those guys to bigger names, guys who might be challengers to the IC title or just more mid-card guys (like Hacksaw Duggan, King Harley Race, Junk Yard Dog, George "The Animal" Steele, etc.). Those were the days of TRUE squashes!

We still have a few of these types, especially Tier 3, around today on WWE TV. Jamie Noble has become one. Santino is one. Chavo is another. Goldust is arguably included here. I have no problem with watching these squash matches. The purpose they serve -- to build people's "star power" up for later stories -- is clear to me. Someone has to elevate the new guys into title contention, right? That's how it's done.

On an interesting side note, Pyrusane, when "Iron" Mike Sharpe first entered the WWF, he was managed by "The Grand Wizard," if I recall correctly, and was a top challenger to Bob Backlund's WWF title. They even had a big title match in Madison Square Garden once. In fact, it was Sharpe's only World Title Match (he obviously lost).

 

[sammysrh]

I'm going to have to throw out my challenge flag on this one.

Rated R, what positives do you see coming out of eliminating squash matches from the broadcasts? Quite obviously you feel as though you would get better matches on Raw, Smackdown, and ECW .... however do you feel as though this in some way may be detrimental to the PPV's?

The more marquee matches you put on free TV, the less of a chance you have of actually seeing new and unique matches for the BIG events that people will soon be paying $45 for. I personally think for this reason, and preserving the integrity of novelty matches on PPV's, that the squash matches are needed.

We have seen the same matches done over, and over, and over again ... and eventually, I think people get bored with that stuff. At least the concept of the squash match allows performers to get TV time, allows performers to get over with the audience as a threat ... and prolongs wrestlers from meeting against one another in the ring.

Do you not see a problem there ... or do you not think people mind seeing John Cena vs Randy Orton .... or Triple H vs Randy Orton .... or John Cena vs Edge plastered all over the weekly shows + the PPV's, 30 times a year?

Okay im going to have to respectfully disagree and agree to something.. I don't believe that we need as many squash matches as we get from Sheamus, Zeke, Vlad, etc... my point being Wouldn't it make lets say Sheamus more dominant if he were scheduled in a 1 on 1 match against lets say Triple H, and he beat him in a clean fall no run ins, no distractions, just a clean pin. I think that would make me think hes more dominant beating Triple H one time rather than beating up Jamie noble 3 times. It makes the fans think psychologically that this guy is the real deal, giving that person to make the chance for a push. You wont necessarily see John Cena vs Orton every week because of a little bit less squash matches. But i do agree with your point that it could take a little out of the ppv... but the way you put it you make it seem as if every match has to be back and forth, If they added 1 of those back and forth matches at least once, maybe twice during the night it might get the fans to think that " hey they are pretty equal" then you have the winner of the first back and forth match go against the one who won the other one that night, it would be 90% likely it would draw something more than what is already drawing. But i think that they should just dim down the squash matches.... Beating Jamie Noble, Funaki, Chavo, etc.. Does not make a big main eventer by doing this every week, If the person that was beating them every week got to get on the mic and call out some big superstar that really doesn't have much going for them for example Kane. And he challenges to that big match at the pay per view.. But with the ppvs starting to lower in count that would make sense for them to do it on raw possibly? But if you think im wrong just tell me!! i love discussions on this stuff.

 

[Mr_billy]

Squash matches are important. They build characters WITHOUT HURTING established stars. Why would anyone book a contender to lose to a new guy and possibly risk injury or hurt someone's standing as a viable contender by having them lose cleanly to a guy who can still fizzle, its just good business. Plus, without the Jabronies we would never of had Dwayne Gill. And sometimes wrestles are good workers and can do a great job putting people over, but lack the charisma to enter the mid card.

 

[pyrusane]

Actually, Pyrusane, The Brooklyn Brawler was Steve Lombardi. He was also a "ham-and-egger." WWF did give Horowitz a tiny storyline push once when he upset someone on WWF TV and Jim Ross screamed, "Horowitz wins! Horowitz wins! Horowitz wins!"

Ouch, got me on that one...and I felt so happy with that reference. Teaches me not to double-check my facts! Good catch man.

On an interesting side note, Pyrusane, when "Iron" Mike Sharpe first entered the WWF, he was managed by "The Grand Wizard," if I recall correctly, and was a top challenger to Bob Backlund's WWF title. They even had a big title match in Madison Square Garden once. In fact, it was Sharpe's only World Title Match (he obviously lost).

I did not know that, at all. I started watching wrestling in the midst of the Savage/Steamboat feud, so that would have been sometime in the 86/87 range. My best memory of Mike Sharpe was that he was the only guy to have a forearm injury longer than Bob Orton. I never saw the guy without that metal forearm band that amazingly never won him a match.

Okay im going to have to respectfully disagree and agree to something.. I don't believe that we need as many squash matches as we get from Sheamus, Zeke, Vlad, etc... my point being Wouldn't it make lets say Sheamus more dominant if he were scheduled in a 1 on 1 match against lets say Triple H, and he beat him in a clean fall no run ins, no distractions, just a clean pin.

No.

Wait, let me clarify that. That would be HUGE for Sheamus. For about a minute. And it destroys one of your top stars in the process. There is absolutely no way you book a match like this for a one-off match on RAW, unless you have some serious plans for this guy that absolutely require this to happen. And even then...you still don't do it.

Back in 2004, Shelton Benjamin was booked to face HHH in Benjamin's first match after being drafted to RAW. Evolution was at ringside. Benjamin got the clean pin. Let me restate that.

Evolution was at ringside.

Benjamin got the clean pin.

This could have been a huge springboard for Shelton. It should have been. Especially since he did it again the following week. What happened instead, however, was that everyone shit all over it. The fans, even the ones not in the IWC, weren't buying it for a second. They knew that the only way your top guy loses clean to a guy that a week earlier was a tag-team wrestler on the "B" show is if the new guy is about to be crammed down our throats and pushed to the moon and back. Shelton hadn't earned that push in the minds of the fans, and so it just felt forced and nothing ever came of it.

Beating Jamie Noble, Funaki, Chavo, etc.. Does not make a big main eventer by doing this every week, If the person that was beating them every week got to get on the mic and call out some big superstar that really doesn't have much going for them for example Kane. And he challenges to that big match at the pay per view..

That just makes me sad. Kane has so much going for him, but unfortunately, its not being used properly.

I like that you're trying to think outside the box, to propose some kind of a change to shake things up a bit. The problem I have is that this proposal would just not work the way you want it to. Going back to your original example of Sheamus calling out HHH, in theory it sounds great but in practice, this would end up being a squash of a different kind. Sheamus has to have a little time first, to a) develop his skills in lower profile matches so that he has a shot at carrying a main event and looking decent, and b) develop a name for himself in the miscard.

Also, look at it from a kayfabe perspective. A newcomer walks in and immediately starts demanding a match with a top guy? Eh, its just not going to happen. He's got to work his way up through the ranks and earn that type of match.

On the other hand, challenging a guy like Kane is actually a pretty decent idea. Kane is a midcard talent, has been in and out of the main event, he's a solid worker that can put on a decent match and help cover the new guy a bit, lead him through it. He's at a level where you can believe in him winning, but if he loses you can accept that as well. It's an upset from a kayfabe perspective, the rookie defeating the savvy veteran and all that, but in reality that is a match that can go either way and not be a huge surprise. Another guy with this same ability would be Goldust. He's a solid performer, a former IC champion, and in this matchup it's not a huge surprise if he wins or loses. A great way to build some credibility without having to make it a total squash. The only problem is...this is exactly what you don't want to do for Sheamus right now.

Sheamus is being cast as a monster heel. The easiest way for him to build that reputation is exactly what they're doing right now. Have him come out each week and absolutely dominate some small guy. Hell, that's how Brock Lesnar started, and he was considered to be a beast...until he started fighting guys that could give him a challenge. He was still a beast even then, but he was a beast that could be tamed. If his first program had been the feud with Kurt Angle, where they traded the title between the two of them and Big Show, then Lesnar would have just been looked at as another big, muscular wrestler. But having him start out by dominating guys like Spike Dudley, and both Hardy's at the same time, he had a chance to become a monster, before he became a mortal.

You just have to ask yourself this...Would you rather watch two big guys have an even matchup all the time, or do want to see the irresistable force finally meet the immovable object, and find out which one is tougher? And now that I've used one of the oldest cliche's in wrestling, I'm out.

 

[markmeout]

Okay im going to have to respectfully disagree and agree to something.. I don't believe that we need as many squash matches as we get from Sheamus, Zeke, Vlad, etc... my point being Wouldn't it make lets say Sheamus more dominant if he were scheduled in a 1 on 1 match against lets say Triple H, and he beat him in a clean fall no run ins, no distractions, just a clean pin. I think that would make me think hes more dominant beating Triple H one time rather than beating up Jamie noble 3 times. It makes the fans think psychologically that this guy is the real deal, giving that person to make the chance for a push. You wont necessarily see John Cena vs Orton every week because of a little bit less squash matches. But i do agree with your point that it could take a little out of the ppv... but the way you put it you make it seem as if every match has to be back and forth, If they added 1 of those back and forth matches at least once, maybe twice during the night it might get the fans to think that " hey they are pretty equal" then you have the winner of the first back and forth match go against the one who won the other one that night, it would be 90% likely it would draw something more than what is already drawing. But i think that they should just dim down the squash matches.... Beating Jamie Noble, Funaki, Chavo, etc.. Does not make a big main eventer by doing this every week, If the person that was beating them every week got to get on the mic and call out some big superstar that really doesn't have much going for them for example Kane. And he challenges to that big match at the pay per view.. But with the ppvs starting to lower in count that would make sense for them to do it on raw possibly? But if you think im wrong just tell me!! i love discussions on this stuff.

If they are going to put shemus, zeke, and koslov in matches that arent jobbed then hell will break loose and there careers will end. Lets say sheamus goes against jack swagger or john cena. No way will the WWE ever let them job to sheamus. In turn Sheamus will not look as strong and not be a competitor thats actually seen as a threat to destroy either of them. Jobbers have their purpose, it is to make the big guys, and girls since beth phoeniox has faced a new jobber each week, look dominate without making someone else who gets tv time look weak and destroy a promising career. Even though I would love to see a fair match between sheamus and the miz, sheamus would look as cool as when he crushed noble.

 

[Aaronliveshere]

What we need more of today is like the match between John Cena (his debut) and Kurt Angle. It was a good fight and a good story match, but Cena lost. When it was over Angle looked like the established veteran, top tier player, and olympic champion he was. John Cena did take the loss, but he looked real strong and that helped with future pushes and titles down the line. If Cena won, it would have made Angle look week and I believe lose creditability that he was a top tier player and champion contender.

If Angle loses and then the next week would have beat the Undertaker (example)...would that have made the rookie John Cena better than the Undertaker? Angle can beat Taker and Cena could beat Angle.

 

[sammysrh]

If they are going to put shemus, zeke, and koslov in matches that arent jobbed then hell will break loose and there carrers will end. Lets say shemus goes against jack swagger or john cena. No way will the WWE ever let them job to shemus. In turn Shemus will not look as stron and not be a competitor thats actually seen as a threat to destroy either of them. Jobbers have their purpose, it is to make the big guys, and girls since beth pheniox has faced a new jobber each week, look dominiate without making someone else who gets tv time look weak and destroy a promising carrer. Even though I would love to see a fair match between shemus and the miz, shemus would look as cool as when he chrushed noble.

yeah I never said have Jack Swagger or Cena job to Sheamus i just said if he were to beat one of them cleanly in a normal match than that would make them a threat.. Yeah if he beats up little 200 lb guys than it just shows the average fan "hey hes a monster" but to a smart wrestling fan that shows " Damn Jamie noble again? who cant beat him?" now if he were to cleanly beat Cena that would prove him as a threat.. But having Cena in a match with him one time will not make him main event status right away.. its way too soon for him he needs at least one mid card title AT LEAST

 

[NSL]

Tier 1 - No-name local jobbers

Tier 2 - "Iron" Mike Sharpe, Steve Lombardi (The Brooklyn Brawler), Barry O, Barry Horowitz, "Playboy" Buddy Rose, "Leapin'" Lanny Poffo, Jumpin' Jim Brunzell, The Conquistadors

These are the types of guys that need to be used for squashes. They don't appear on PPVs, and aren't used more than 2 weeks in a row. WWE's problem now is that they're using guys that we want to see pushed to put over some guy that will never wear a belt.

I liked Kozlov...For a month. Then he got stale. All the guys that laid in his wake though, still impressed me, and I wanted to see them more than once a month. The same thing will happen to Sheamus, and that worries me. He's a really good wrestler, but don't put him over someone like Noble, who can actually wrestle a good match.

 

[deshbo]

Squash matches are just a waist of tv time because it don't prove anything for any wrestler. Unless you have a new comer on the seen facing atleast a midcard wrestler he will not be able to show his skills because once he face a squasher we all know he will win easily with no contest so it don't make much sense for that and it don't prove that you are a good wrestler. To me i don't see why we should be seeing guys like sheamus facing noble when there's no contest there, he should be wrestling guys like mark henry, mvp, swagger,miz etc. Those are more evenly matched guys as him that he can compete with.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Okay, so for people taking up the concept of less squash matches, I have yet to hear any of your responses to what that actually means long term for the business.

What you are then advocating essentially, is that PPV quality matches be given away for free on weekly TV. And let me guess. You are also the same people who don't bother purchasing the PPV's either?

So for the people who do actually pay their hard-earned money to watch the PPV's, essentially you are ruining the novelty approach by only offering them matches they have likely already seen on Raw, Smackdown, or ECW.

I am someone that used to get excited for new feuds going on at PPV's. Feuds that I have never seen before and two guys wrestling each other for the first time. That's the way it always used to be. I can't get into that anymore, or get excited for PPV's, because the chances are 99.9% that anyone who is wrestling each other, I have already seen wrestle on Raw, Smackdown, or ECW.

Now, do you guys actually not get tired of the same people wrestling each other over and over? Because that is exactly what is contributing to the staleness factor in WWE these days ... and is making people's enjoyment of the product ultimately go down. You aren't giving them anything to actually look forward to anymore.

In my opinion, it's very selfish. Especially for those that don't bother paying for PPV's, to advocate this type of thing. Frankly, you are among some of the top fans that I should be the most angry with.

 

[SavageTaker]

If anything there should be more squash matches. And there are three reasons why.

Firstly, it builds up talent. I think it’s quite obvious that they aren’t going to give some guy who just debuted a win over the top dogs of the company. So what better way than to give him a few wins over some unknown talent? By doing that, their credibility starts rising even if it’s little by little.

Secondly, it allows fans to see what they are capable of doing. For example, if Jack Swagger made his debut on Raw and faced Triple H, I would probably have low expectations for the match and might not even bother watching it. But if he can showcase his ability via squash matches then I would know if he is someone that I should watch because I like him or if I should turn the channel when he comes.

Finally, it keeps the big matches on pay per view. There’s nothing wrong with having big matches on Free TV, but the problem is that they do it too often. If they have more squash matches then it means they can reserve the best matches for pay per view. When I see a pay per view, I want to see the best they’ve got and see someone I haven’t seen before. With a lot of recent pay per views, they have had the same matches over and over and over again. Once they have some new matches then I get excited because like I said, I’ve never seen them before. Basically what I’m saying is that, if I were to buy ppv’s, then I would want to get my money’s worth. And that can’t happen if they are throwing away Chris Jericho vs. Undertaker on Smackdown for example.

In summation, more squash matches are needed because it allows for the wrestler’s credibility to rise and for the fans to see what they are capable of doing. Also, because it keeps the big matches on pay per views therefore allowing the fans to get their money’s worth when they see the matches.

 

[JBK2008]

Squash matches are needed to elevate new and young talent or to convince the fans that an already established wrestler is still very dominant. It keeps the ppv level matches off the regular shows, which draws more interest when the ppv comes. If we were getting ppv caliber matches week in, week out, then nobody would want to pay for the ppvs when they can see it free on tv. There should be more squash matches just so a certain wrestler can be elevated and everyone would want to see that guy face the top talent down the road.

 

[pyrusane]

I offer for your consideration two different debut matches.

Exhibit A)
[youtube]nAJdjeV3ZuA[/youtube]
Now, on the surface and in retrospect, this is a very good match. Cena comes across looking strong, looking like he could have won the match, but Angle still looks strong as well, and the veteran wins it. The problem is, that is when viewed through the blinders of hindsight.

The reality of the situation is, unless you followed OVW at the time, you had absolutely no clue who John Cena was. Literally, the reaction he got from Angle in the ring is the same reaction he got from probably 85% of fans watching when he came out. Yes, he fought a close match (and proved that he does know more than the five moves people ridiculously accuse him of) but the problem was that no one cared. After this match, Cena was instantly shuffled to the bottom of the midcard, where he would remain until he finally figured out a gimmick that worked, and the doctor of thuganomics was born.

Exhibit B)
[youtube]MxyfIteG8G4[/youtube]
Now, this is a debut handled in a far different way. For those of you who don't remember Sonny Rodgers, he's one of those ham-and-eggers I mentioned earlier. You knew as soon as you saw him in this match that HHH was going to win, but it gave him a chance to show what he could do. This type of start allowed him to work his way up through the rankings, rather than start out against the top guy, lose, and then get shuffled into the mix with everyone else. Plus, I just had to show this, if for no other reason than for the sheer fact that at the time, HHH used an RKO as his finisher and it was called the Pedigree.

While I certainly applaud the desire to see more competitive matches on TV, I just don't see the logic in doing so by putting an untested rookie over one of your top guys. It is very rarely going to give the rookie any kind of sustained momentum, and it can only hurt the veteran, weaken their image so that the PPV Main Event they are fighting in two weeks from now means that much less.

Think about it..."Sheamus beat Triple H last week. This week HHH has a match for the WWE Title against John Cena. Well, hell, if Sheamus beat him, why doesn't Sheamus have the title match? Oh, Cena beat HHH? Well, so did Sheamus. Oh, HHH beat Cena? Hell, he couldn't even beat Sheamus, so thy must both be weak."

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense right? But that is what that line of thinking leads to. A while back Miz had his little one-sided feud with John Cena, and a lot of people were upset that Cena basically squashed him in their first match. But the thing is, that had to happen. Cena is always going to be one of the top two or three contenders for the title, if not the champion. To have Miz go over him in their very first match not only weakens Cena, at least a little, but it also says that Miz now has earned a spot in the title picture as well. A spot that he was not and is not ready for yet. Since then they have had more competitive matches, and Miz has a solid spot at the top of the midcard, where he currently belongs. But that first match had to be a squash, or else it would not have been taken seriously and now we would be talking about how we were having Miz shoved down our throats, much the way some people on here complain about Cena himself.

 

[gd]

Wow, a lot of stupidity in here. First of all, you have to understand what a squash match is. Randy Orton v. Mark Henry is not a squash match, neither is Swagger or Bourne. A squash match is something that is soley for the purpose of making the winner look good. Sheamus/Noble would fall under this category and it was something that was good. It made Sheamus look like a bad ass in the way that he destroyed Noble, didn't take up much time, and didn't hurt any established superstar.

You can't just have Sheamus come in and beat HHH right away. That's ridiculous. The fans wouldn't but it, it would make HHH look silly, and it may or may not help Sheamus in the long run.

Squash matches are a vital part of wrestling, especially on free TV. It exposes new wrestlers to the audience and gives them a reaso to care, as well as saving the big matches for PPV. This is something that will be in wrestling for a long time to come.

 

[Kanye South]

Every match you watch is not supposed to be a 5-Star match. Squash matches are designed to make the winner look like a million bucks.

For example, if some random local wrestler had a long, technical match with Sheamus, then it would be pointless because we will likely never see the guy again. Why would the WWE invest time into some guy that will only be there for one night rather than a guy who will be there for years to come and eventually main event? The point of squash matches is to build up superstars as dominant and strong forces to be reckoned with.

Plus it's always fun to hear Michael Cole attempt to sound legit in his "serious" voice.

"And folks this is a career-altering injury...."

.

 

[Southwind]

Squash matches are an integral part of building up new talent, haven't you noticed when a new star starts, they get boosted with squash matches ?

What are you going to replace the squash matches with ? If you are going to complain you have to list alternatives.

I feel squash matches are fine and people over-react too much so what if some jobber gets killed ? If it ultimately creates new stars then it's all justified if you ask me.

Not every match is going to be a five star match, some people have to accept that, and realize that squash matches are one of the few ways to make new talent relevant.

Look at Sheamus right now, he is getting over by demolishing local jobbers and guys like Jamie Noble.

When Sheamus gets a larger push (which I expect) squash matches will have played a big part in his rise.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

We basically have to get rid of squash matches because they aren't entertaining to the ROH bots out there. They are only interested in 5 star matches on Free TV. And I can bet you that these people don't purchase the PPV's either. So they are also cheap pricks, as well, that expect something for nothing.

But we absolutely must get rid of squash matches. Because if we do ... then we can have at least:

15 John Cena vs Randy Orton matches on Raw, per year.
15 John Cena vs Triple H matches on Raw, per year
15 John Cena vs Edge matches on Raw, per year
15 Triple H vs Randy Orton matches on Raw, per year
15 Undertaker vs Big Show matches on Smackdown, per year

and while we're at it ... we mine as well throw the same matches on the PPV's, since we all know that fans simply can't get enough of these matches with the same performers wrestling each other.

Hell, we mine as well do John Cena vs Randy Orton every week on Raw. Nobody will get tired of that, as long as they put on a good match.

 

[Lancer]

Squash matches are a necessary evil in pro wrestling. Either that or we get stupid circus acts like this:

[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ySvlvqyJM3k&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ySvlvqyJM3k&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
[/YOUTUBE]

That has no place in professional wrestling. Taz says it best: "They don't have a boxing background."

Or big mistakes like this (no audio):

[YOUTUBE]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FA2PQEyKP7w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FA2PQEyKP7w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

They took a rookie to pro wrestling, an MMA fighter like Puder, and put him in the ring with one of the top stars in the business in Kurt Angle. Can anyone say clusterfuck? He could have broken Angle's arm with that keylock. That is why you do not take an unproven performer and put them in the ring with a top performer straight out of the gate.

You risk the new guy pissing the veteran off, as evidenced by Angle's snub of Puder's handshake. Also, you risk the veteran getting made to look like a fool at the hands of a nobody. Angle was only saved by the ref counting to three, since Puder's shoulders were on the mat.

Squash matches are there to build new stars slowly, to see what kinks they have in their game, and where they need improvement in connecting with the crowd and the other wrestlers. Yes, they are basically pulverizing the jobber, but are they pulverizing him correctly?

 

[Kaze Enigma]

We basically have to get rid of squash matches because they aren't entertaining to the ROH bots out there. They are only interested in 5 star matches on Free TV. And I can bet you that these people don't purchase the PPV's either. So they are also cheap pricks, as well, that expect something for nothing.

But we absolutely must get rid of squash matches. Because if we do ... then we can have at least:

15 John Cena vs Randy Orton matches on Raw, per year.
15 John Cena vs Triple H matches on Raw, per year
15 John Cena vs Edge matches on Raw, per year
15 Triple H vs Randy Orton matches on Raw, per year
15 Undertaker vs Big Show matches on Smackdown, per year

and while we're at it ... we mine as well throw the same matches on the PPV's, since we all know that fans simply can't get enough of these matches with the same performers wrestling each other.

Hell, we mine as well do John Cena vs Randy Orton every week on Raw. Nobody will get tired of that, as long as they put on a good match.

Sidious i respect you as a poster, i dont often agree with you but i do tonight.

However you shouldn't be so sarcastic to the other posters.

yes i know im a noob in these forums but we have the right to post our own opinions.

So in other words if you dont like what their saying just deal and not be a prick.


Anyway to the question at hand.

Jobbers are needed, they are the bread and butter of this buisness, nearly every star we take for granted today have jobbed in the past, HHH has, HBK did, Matt and Jeff hardy jobbed for about 2 years before even earning a contract, but yet they are the biggest stars in the buissness today.

Except for matt

 

[Tastycles]

You need jobbers, otherwise you end up with a WCW like situation where nobody buys the PPVs and nobody is really over because they lose momentum all the time. Low card guys need to be there so that they can lose to the champions.

However, it needn't be a squash match. Evan Bourne has been a jobber on Raw, but because he gives everyone a decent fight week in week out, it doesn't seem like a shit your pants amazing moment when he does win.

Having a big dominant guy beat a local wrestler isn't bad either, because that's how you make your guys truly dominant. The only thing I really object to is the volume of people who start with undefeated streaks against these nobodies. It's very lazy booking, and often doesn't lead anywhere.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Sidious i respect you as a poster, i dont often agree with you but i do tonight.

Thank you.

However you shouldn't be so sarcastic to the other posters.

yes i know im a noob in these forums but we have the right to post our own opinions.

I agree that there are times that I can be sarcastic. But I don't think any more sarcastic than anybody else. I'm not like that all the time. But when I am fairly annoyed with something, I certainly may be sarcastic, yes.

I think the thing that should be kept in mind is exactly what you admitted to. You are a Noob on here. And where as you have every right to say what you please on here, as long as it is relative to the thread topic and not considered spam, you need to pay your dues a little more on here if you expect me to take what you have to say with anything other than a grain of salt. And even then, it would be questionable, as I have a mind of my own. But at this early stage for you ... especially.

So in other words if you dont like what their saying just deal and not be a prick.

How about this. I'll deal with what they're saying ... and I'll use discretion on whether to be a prick or not? Thanks.

Anyway to the question at hand.

Jobbers are needed, they are the bread and butter of this buisness, nearly every star we take for granted today have jobbed in the past, HHH has, HBK did, Matt and Jeff hardy jobbed for about 2 years before even earning a contract, but yet they are the biggest stars in the buissness today.

Except for matt

Jobbers have a much more critical role in wrestling than people realize. As you said, in many ways, they are the bread and butter of the wrestling business. And they are a concept that so many fans take for granted.

If used correctly, they will:

1) Give superstars some TV time
2) Get superstars over with the audience
3) Keep superstars that are in feuds with each other, AWAY from each other until the big match on the PPV
4) Provide opportunities for angles to take place on occasion (a superstar's opponent can interfere in the match)
5) Allow WWE to scout jobbers for potential to move up and be repackaged into the Main Roster
6) Keep television content fresh by featuring a variety of jobbers, instead of the regulars


There are many advantages to using jobbers on a regular basis, to preserve the creativity of the product, and to prevent it from getting stale (like we see today) ... to the point where nobody cares about the PPV's anymore.