Rookie debuts?

[truk24]

Now that Superstars is a weekly show, and the WWE has more time to develop younger stars. Wouldn't it make sense to debut rookies on Superstars? After all Superstars is a neautral show. Isn't it? Meaning that all three shows get a chance to "scout" this newbie, and potential future leader of one of those shows. Having these new guys just show up on a show randomly just doesn't explain why they chose that particular show as opposed to the other.

Scouting the talent for a week or two places attention the new talent. Thus, making it seem all the more important. The attention on the newbie gets the audience familiar(hopefully) with them. Creative could a ton of ways with this as well. Each show doing what they can to pursuae that rookie to join their show. If the WWE wants the fans to accept these new stars then they have to give them their 15 minutes of fame. Finally to top it all off an official contract signing. They do it with matches, and I think it makes sense to officially sign rookies to the show as well.

 

[phemom]

I agree with that point, but there is one problem....no one would watch it. Already most people (including many on this board) haven't even seen an episode of SuperStars. What do you think will happen if people found out main event/mid-card talent wouldn't be on?

Personally I like the complete randomness of SS right now, sometimes feuds will continue, sometimes new talent, sometime main-event caliber matches which is great for a 1hour show on Thursdays. The only thing I would add is more tittle defenses on the show...

 

["Cool Guy" Jensen]

Yeah, I guess a rookie could debut on Superstars, but the only problem is that I doubt that each show would fight over that particular superstar. They usually want the more decorated superstar on their brand, not some rookie. I'm not saying that it wouldn't work... I'm just saying it would be too completely to then figure out what brand to put them on. It would have been a lot easier to just let him debut on that brand altogether.

Question: Do you mean have someone's debut MATCH on Superstars, similar to Tyler Reks or do you mean their WWE debut?

 

[truk24]

I mean both, but to which ever comes first. That actual ring debut may happen before a vingette, or plain old announcement. Like I said Superstars is or appears to be the "Neautral" show. Which places more of an emphasis on the individual and to the show they may end up on. I mean the show is called Superstars. What better name for a show that would have part of its show possibly dedicated to rookies? Its the show where their WWE careers begin, as well as a show dedicated to other parts of the WWE.

 

[TSG]

You know I like this idea. All these guys coming up from FCW could have their time to shine.

Take ECW this Tuesday for example. Instead of the usual great action, there were a bunch of debuts. Two that come to my mind are Yoshi tatsu and Sheamus. Now instead of what they did Tuesday, they could use this idea. Instead of these debuts, WWe.com could announce that ECW has signed three new bright stars, all of which will make their debut on Superstrs. Then we could of replace Kendrick and Santino with Yoshi and Shelton, Sheamus could have made his debut against maybe Funaki or Jesse in an interpromotional match, and we could have still had Reks and Ryder wrestle plus Punk and Edge still in the Main Event. Then we could of had a match between two new ECW superstrs, Goldust and Benjamin, on ECW and the only debut made would have been Washington and his talk show.

So all in all, this is a great idea and could be a way to show new superstars without taking away time from established roster members on the regular shows, like what happened Tuesday and I mentioned above.

 

[wewanttables]

An all rookie show would get no ratings. Wrestlers need to be seen on one of the regular chanels so they are not confused for local talent. Also, I don't believe these 5 match winning streaks with locals do newcomers any good. Place them in matches versus guys we recognize. Cody Rhodes debuted against Orton. Cena debuted against Angle. Gail Kim debted and won the women's championship. Granted people that the WWE is not sure they will keep will start against guys lower on the card and that they are more familar with. It appears they are doing that with the Yoshi Tatsu debuted against Benjamin who I had read had done some training for them at the FCW. So what Shamus destroyed someone we don't know. Put on a good match with Golddust or Ezekile Jackson or someone that we have seen wrestle before.

 

[truk24]

Don't recall saying anything about an all rookie show. Didn't you read anything I said? Anyhow keep the show as it is, but like I said. Maybe this could be a show for rookies to debut on. You act as if all rookies are debuted at the same. Superstars isn't based on any "one" show, as it is neautral as I stated before. Thus, debuting rookies on a neautral show allows for the GM's to scout them. It should be a process, and not an all of a sudden situation that a newbie shows up on RAW, Smackdown, or ECW without any explanantion.

 

[Joup7]

i think we could see a mixture of this. Superstars should have at least 2 matches of developed stars every night. Otherwise nobody would watch. But I like the idea of debuting a talent on that show, perhaps an elite prospect ala Brock Lesnar or MVP or somebody who would get a mega-push quick. Then the other shows can bid for his rights. Like a month long thing. But only have this a few times a year to keep it fresh.

 

[gd]

This thing is that Superstar isn't a brand, it's a show that essentialy features the one match they didn't have time for from each of the other shows. I think that WWE has done a good job of making ECW the AAA brand while Raw and SD are the majors. The "Superstar Initiative" is a perfect way to explain why the rookies are there.

Also, there is a very small audience that watches Superstars, I think they get under 1.0 ratings. If the WWE really wants to see what a rookie is all about, they should but him in front of a bigger audience.