Officially requesting input on Depth Chart for Monday

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Last month Wrestlezone came up with a pretty terrible edition of the Depth Chart, as JGlass was kind enough to point out for all of us. The thing most clearly and often said was that we need a system that doesn't hinge on our personal opinions, and focusses more on data. I took a lot of suggestions from the ones actually giving them, and after tinkering with a new system for about 4 hours I pitched it the guys above me and I basically got the go-ahead to do whatever I wanted with it. After a little more work I went back and FF'd through every episode of Impact, Raw, and Smackdown (as well as the A.A.O. PPV), collected data, tinkered a bit more for fine-tuning and watched it all over again to apply the new system.

So, posted below is a screenshot of the way the rankings look right now... Keep in mind, this means the only thing not factored in is WWE's Elimination Chamber PPV, which is likely to garner the most amount of points yet -- virtually every spot can change. The reason you see three TNA guys in the top three positions is simple: all of them have been putting in 10-20 minutes of matches every single week on Impact, Roode has had several title matches, and TNA has had a PPV. My hope is that after the Chamber it all evens itself out...

Basically, if you haven't figured it out, there is a point value attributed to virtually everything one can do as a pro wrestler. Win a match, win a match via DQ, win a title match, retain a title, run interference, cut a promo, be seen in a video package, make a return, kick off the show, wrestle in the main event...it's all taken into account, with even more modifiers for the length and quality of every match and/or promo. And if there is ever a tie, or two stars come close and an analysis of creative is needed over mechanics, that is where my personal opinion will come into play.

So here's what I need feedback on:
-Right off the bat, what's good and what's bad? What improved, and what depreciated?
-For those of you that saw and/or commented on last month's Depth Chart, how does this list compare purely within the stars in the Top 10?
-How should I be scoring the actual Elimination Chamber matches? Should I calculate time spent from when they step out of a pod to the minute they are eliminated? Should I count moves that utilize the structure as "foreign object" shots? Should the winner be granted more points than a traditional wrestling match?
-If you have any comments on a particular wrestler that you might like to appear in the fan portion of this month's Depth Chart, you may also make them here and note your submission.

Thanks guys for all your (mostly) helpful criticism thus far. Please, if you think it will help, keep it coming!

 

[¡Roján!]

Nice to see John freakin' Cena livin' it up with Primo and Tamina. Hey, a least he beat out Epico by alphabetization!

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

That's an awful lot of work for a column man.

 

[Johnny Scumm]

Nice to see Brandon Jacobs has more points than the man Main-Eventing Wrestlemania.

 

[JGlass]

Right off the bat, you look at your top 3 guys and you have all TNA guys. Why? Because TNA spends more time focusing on the top of their card than the WWE. So that's a problem right there, success in TNA doesn't translate to overall success.

I don't understand how Wade Barrett is so high. Since losing to Orton, he's done nothing.

Big Show has been doing a lot... but it hasn't really been good. Sting should be in that spot.

Both Cena, Ryder, and Kane should be higher. Their storyline is corny, but it's one of the most entertaining bits in the WWE right now.

I can't identify the system you used, but it looks like it's based on amount of appearance on TV, matches wrestled, matches won, etc. etc. If that's the case, shouldn't Khali be close to the top of the list? He's been all over the place since returning to the WWE.

 

[ABMorales787]

Wait? Ray, Storm and Roode beat out everyone else? That is just priceless. Not that it's really that far off. The 3 of them have wrestled a lot recently on the broadcasts.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Wait? Ray, Storm and Roode beat out everyone else? That is just priceless. Not that it's really that far off. The 3 of them have wrestled a lot recently on the broadcasts.

Right off the bat, you look at your top 3 guys and you have all TNA guys. Why? Because TNA spends more time focusing on the top of their card than the WWE. So that's a problem right there, success in TNA doesn't translate to overall success.

Logic would dictate that because TNA has had a PPV they have had more chances for their stars to rack up points. Logic would also dictate that because all three of those men have been in 10-20 minute matches every single week, they've had more time to rack up points. I don't really know what to tell you, as you obviously didn't read the part where I said "after the Elimination CHamber things should even out". Even if that weren't the case, there's only so much I can do to handicap TNA! WHen their wrestlers are wrestling twice as much as WWE's main event guys, and when the quality of said matches is twice as good on a consistent basis, they are going to outscore WWE talents... Using my system, TNA guys already score less than WWE for doing the same exact thing -- as you said, success in TNA isn't overall success. If I crippled them anymore it would be completely unfair. Wait until after the Chamber, where the entire Top 10 will likely be entirely different.

I don't understand how Wade Barrett is so high. Since losing to Orton, he's done nothing.

I believe it was simply because of their No DQ match several weeks ago, and the amount of appearances he has made since then.

Big Show has been doing a lot... but it hasn't really been good. Sting should be in that spot.

Even though I think Big Show has been a lot more entertaining recently than he has been in the past, I tend to agree with you. All I'm giving you right now is a list of how everyone scored... You can't tell me to dock TNA further than I already am, and then complain when one of their guys isn't outscoring the Big Show.

Both Cena, Ryder, and Kane should be higher. Their storyline is corny, but it's one of the most entertaining bits in the WWE right now.

Look...I agree. But there is a system in place churning out these numbers, not my personal preferences. None of them have even wrestled a match since the Royal Rumble (I think Cena wrestled one...?), so there's really only so much I can do man... Cena and Kane will probably kill each other in the Chamber and score a lot of points in the process.

I can't identify the system you used, but it looks like it's based on amount of appearance on TV, matches wrestled, matches won, etc. etc. If that's the case, shouldn't Khali be close to the top of the list? He's been all over the place since returning to the WWE.

Khali is where he is because all of his matches are under 4 minutes long! That's a significant amount of points for somebody so terrible, and he'll get even more in the Chamber. It's not just about wins and loses, but the quality and length of those wins and loses too! I'm not going to give Khali the same amount of points for a 2 minute win that I would to CM Punk for a 20 minute match... That makes no sense.

Thanks for the feedback. Here are a few things to take from this: everyone seems to be looking at the chart and ignoring anything I said and/or the logic that goes with it. TNA had a PPV, WWE has a PPV tomorrow. Chill about the top 3 for now, ok? Also, this is almost completely points based. When all is said and done and the Chamber points have been factored in, I'll take a look at everything and if decisions need to be made I'll make them. Simple enough. If John Cena gets a ton of points at the Chamber but narrowly misses a spot by 2 or 3 points...I'll probably take him over whoever was in the spot, because it's Cena and his work is always more important to the company.

Ya'll asked for a more balanced system based on facts. I can tell you, you may not like the results, but the system is balanced. I had my friend, who has a degree in statistics, take a look at it. He changed a few things and worked with me to make sure the entire thing is as balanced as it can get right now. After the Chamber is over and we see the results of a full month's worth of schedule, we can go back and change things if need-be.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

You are not going to find a system that everyone likes.

 

[¡Roján!]

How many times do I have to say this? Statistics don't mean jack in wrestling. According to this, CM Punk wouldn't be number one (I'm guessing) during the whole shoot scenario. He hadn't wrestled a match for like 4 weeks.

Just use personal opinion but, not of smarky fans, of well-informed journalists. Not that you'll find many on the WrestleZone team.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

You're doing fine, don't listen to these ******s i.e.; JCrass