Round 2: Blue Cardinal -vs- Dirty Jose

Discussion in 'Debater's League 2010' started by D-Man, Aug 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. D-Man

    D-Man Gone but never forgotten.

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    1,607
    The Knockouts Tag Team Championship, a great creative idea or a complete joke?

    This is a second round match in the Debater's League. Blue Cardinal is the home debater and gets to choose which side of the debate they will be on and who debates first, but they have 24 hours to make their choice.

    This thread is for DEBATERS ONLY and will end on Friday at 2pm EST.

    Good luck.​
     
  2. Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra

    Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra Kinda Sorta Old School

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    507
    I'll take the choice of the Knockout Tag Team Titles being a complete joke and I'll start this one off. Now for that pesky little thing called an opening arguement.


    I believe the TNA Knockout Tag Team Championships are a complete joke because first and foremost they are useless. There aren't enough women in TNA to fill a decent women's division much less a women's division and tag team division. Plus the ladies that are there aren't "real" tag teams. As much as I hate that term it's true, the only thing resembling a true tag team is the Beautiful People stable that consists of three women. Last I checked a tag team was 2 people but who's counting?

    Another point I'd like to address is the purpose of the belts, if there was one. Most belts in wreslting are something to be coveted, chased after, and when someone finally wins one it should be a huge celebration for that particular person. That's just not the case with these belts. As I said earlier there aren't enough women in TNA to fill both divisions so the main focus of all the Knockouts is the Knockout Championship, not to find a partner to chase the tag belts. What do the tag belts do for the ladies that win them? Most lower tier championships help build a wrestler up to the main event or the world championship but the Knockout titles have yet to do any of that. To date only one Knockout Tag Champ has gone on to win the Knockout Title afterwards and that was Madison Rayne. Even that isn't really a true stat because she won the tag title under the Freebird rule and winning the tag titles was to get the stable over, not just her.

    My last point(for now) is the rate that the belts change hands and how. The championships were created on September 20, 2009 and didn't change hands til January 4, 2010. I know that doesn't sound like a long time but you have to remember what the date 1/4/10 means in wrestling, it was the day that TNA decided to take on WWE on Mondays. Why do I bring this up? Well it's because in my eyes the only reason the belts changed hands that day on Impact was to add to the show, not the match or the champions themselves. The next time the titles changed hands was because they were vacated, is that really the way to treat a new championship? Our next TNA KO Tag champs ended up being 3 people, yeah 3 people to hold two belts, and I covered this in the paragraph above but that title reign wasn't to to get the champs over, it was to get a stable over. Our last title change just occurred recently on Impact when Taylor Wilde and Hamada won them off the BP. One thing all these with the exception of the inaugural match had, they all happened on free tv, last I checked this was a tag title not a TV title. It goes to show what the promotion really thinks of them.

    So after looking at all this I've come to the definate conclusion the the TNA Knockout Tag Team Championships are a complete joke. Good luck Jose.
     
    DirtyJosé likes this.
  3. DirtyJosé

    DirtyJosé Best angle of all: retirement

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    1,175
    While contemplating how to address my side of this debate, I noted the wording of the topic: "The Knockouts Tag Team Championship, a great creative idea or a complete joke?". This is about the concept of the TNA Knockouts Tag Team Championship, not the individuals who have competed for it, not it's history, and not how TNA has utilized it since it's debut under a year ago. As a question of whether or not the idea of a women's tag division is ridiculous or not, I feel that it is indeed a great creative idea.

    Coming into the end of 2009, one of TNA's hottest properties was it's women's division, the Knockouts. Quarter-hour ratings breakdowns at the time showed that Knockouts matches and segments were among the highest rated on the show fairly consistently. The collection of female wresters was quite impressive, with an especially varied collection of homebrew talent. Awesome Kong, ODB, Tara, Daffney, Angelina Love, and Taylor Wilde each were able to take turns feuding for the belt, and other girls like Madison Rayne were quickly becoming ready for title shots.

    Seeing as how one of TNA's biggest obstacles for quite some time now has been giving their brand a unique identity, a quality women's division capable of supporting singles and tag titles would have done wonders for TNA's image and reputation. However, like many other concept TNA created, time was never properly allocated to develop a good women's tag scene, and a series of events that led to a champion leaving the promotion killed any momentum the belts may have built up by that point.

    First of all, don't forget about the Freebirds, or Demolition, and other 3-man tag teams. The concept is not unprecedented. Sarita and Wilde felt like a real tag team, in that they had matching outfits and used the same music. And TNA had enough women at one point to do it, including girls like Hemme and Brooks. Many had enough history with each other to make pairings which would have made sense in kayfabe, a key component of a quality tag team. What would have been needed would have been a solid 30 minutes of Impact each week to showcase both the Knockout Title and the Knockout Tag Titles.

    This is getting more into whether or not TNA has used the titles well more than it is addressing whether or not they were a good idea. Also, I feel I should point out the case of Hamada; a Knockout seemingly set up for a good push as co-champion with Awesome Kong, only to be stopped abruptly in the wake of a scandal involving Kong assaulting Bubba the Love Sponge, and her disagreements with the company regarding their pay (an issue also mentioned by Tara during her brief absence). Hamada, like the belts, disappeared from television as the chaos played itself out and Kong left the company. She didn't return for four months. She is currently half of the tag team champions, having partnered up with Taylor Wilde in her return match. I expect Hamada, a great performer, to receive a bit of the push that was planned for her at the beginning of the year. Perhaps that will show you that TNA can use these belts to groom performers for a singles title run as you'd like them to.

    A month and a half into the belts' existence, the announcement of Hulk Hogan coming to TNA sent the entire creative team into lame duck mode, in which very little was done with any title which was meaningful. The Legends Title underwent transformation into the Global Title entirely on free television, so it's clear that TNA's treatment of undercard titles was shameful and short sighted. The title change on 1/4/10 was a good move by the creative and booking team, as it added some buzz (cheap buzz, but still) to what was their biggest show to date, and it gave a good shot of exposure to the division to newer fans. After Hogan's arrival, tensions arose with their tag champion, and quite possibly their best Knockout, Awesome Kong. After the drama that ensued, TNA had no choice but to vacate the titles and crown new champions. Any momentum the belts got from their exposure on 1/4/10 was killed, and it will (and has) taken more than a few months to earn that momentum back.

    None of these strike me as problems with the belts as a concept, but as problems with TNA balancing it's act well. Given half a year and the right mixture of talent, and women's tag division could be a legitimate undercard draw for TNA, and something it could point to that makes it unique from the WWE. TNA would only have to give it the time that it needs on television each week to rebuild interest.

    I feel that the concept of a Knockouts Tag Team Championship can be a great tool and asset to TNA, if treated properly. Thank you, and good luck to you as well, Blue.
     
  4. Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra

    Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra Kinda Sorta Old School

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    507
    The belts are a joke, not a very funny joke either. You say you're looking at the concept of the KO Tag Titles not the history, individuals that competed for them, and how they have been used but all those things are what have made the belts such a joke.

    Where has it gone since the inception of the championships? Now I'm not going to imply that the KO Tag Titles absolutly killed the women's division in TNA but they sure as hell didn't help it too much. Having both a singles and tag division has really hurt ratings for the women's division. Want proof? The all knockout episode of impact drew a 0.6 on the last day of 2009. That was after the inception of the belts. So if having a women's tag division is hurting the women's division as a whole what makes that a good concept? A good concept would be something that works, which this clearly isn't.

    Just because something is unique doesn't make it good, look at the Great Khali for instance, he's unique, he's also shit.

    The next part I bolded was those two little words, would have. First I want to know what next weeks Missouri Lottery numbers are if you know what it would have done. But in all seriousness splitting a small division to have more championship belts is a bad idea all around. Having 13 women in TNA (I'm actually counting Hemme and SoCal Val here for you too) and three champions isn't a good concept, it takes away the prestige from the belts. The same thing happened to the WWF European, Hardcore, and Light Heavyweight championships in the WWF/E, having too many Cheifs and not enough Indians comes to mind to describe this dilema.


    I would never. Those are exceptions, not the rule though.

    There's those words again, would have. If the concept was so good and innovative don't you think someone would have tried a little harder to see that they got enough time? Not that it would have mattered much but... damn I said would have. The fact is that the concept isn't a good one and it's showed. Hell I remember quite a few times in LD when a women's tag match came on that you would crack a joke or say "time for a piss break" something along those lines.

    Alright a hypothetical here. Say Vince wanted to have himself a women's tag division would you really want to see it? I know I wouldn't and I'm pretty sure you wouldn't. In fact I'm almost positive that most people wouldn't want to see that or care if it did happen, you can tell by the LD's when women's wrestling is on, you can tell by the amount of T shirts you see people wearing, and you can tell by the way women have always been treated in wrestling. No one really cares about women's wrestling in general so why would the concept of more women's wrestling be a good concept?

    All of this points to the belts being a complete joke. The fact that the champions disappeared out of nowhere straight up fucks the belts and makes them very laughable, maybe if they were a more established title it would be a different story, but it's not. As for Hamada getting a push, only time will tell if it happens, but being one half of the tag team champions isn't making me think she's anymore of a threat to the singles belt.

    The drama from these belts is never ending is it? Makes me want to laugh.

    The problem IS the concept though. The concept of having that many women's titles to go along with all the men's championsips isn't a good idea, too many belts isn't a good thing. We saw it happen in the WWF and we're seeing it happen now. I just don't see how anyone would think adding more belts to a lackluster division would be anything more than a big joke. The KO division might have been a high point for TNA when they made the belts, but that's more of a testament to how the product as a whole was doing. Which goes into another reason why this was a bad idea, why fuck with your best thing you have going? I'm sure you've heard the expression "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" that applies here.


    :lmao: That's me laughing at the idea of the Knockout Tag Team Championships being a good idea.
     
  5. DirtyJosé

    DirtyJosé Best angle of all: retirement

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    1,175
    The belts are in about the same shape as the rest of TNA's undercard belts. Is that the fault of the concept, or the execution? TNA has shown before that they can ruin a good thing. A well booked Knockouts Tag Division could be a decent draw for TNA, and instead they treat it as an afterthought.

    That 4 hour long New Year's Eve special episode of Impact was aired on a holiday evening, competing against plenty of other specials. And as I mentioned before, TNA was suffering at this time from broken pushes, constant swerves, and angles that went nowhere in anticipation of 1/4/10. It was lame duck season in creative, and it showed in the product. Many fans simply chose to ignore TNA until 1/4/10.

    But those titles (with the exception of the Hardcore title) never drew an audience. Those divisions never showed in ratings that people were really into it. Knockout segments always do quite well for TNA. The introduction of tag belts allows them to have a upper card Knockout division match, and have a lower card Knockout Tag division match, and avoid having that WWE feel of cramming all the women into one 4 minute match on Raw which matters nothing in the long run. 11-13 women is a fine number to run the Knockout division around. That leaves room for combinations of enough teams and solo players to keep things fresh. Take into account that if TNA was serious enough about adding some spice to the Knockouts, they can always call in girls from SHIMMER and other indy promotions that they maintain working relationships with.

    But isn't that what the 3-man team rule is called? The "Freebird Rule"? A 3-man team holding the belts is supposed to feel a bit cheaty and cheap; that's why it's usually a heel tactic. And The Beautiful People are a heel group.

    This is TNA we're talking about (and for the record, those were usually Raw LD's). Follow up is not their best strength. They took the television time to transform the Legends Title into the Global Title, and it promptly disappeared until the next year. They spent weeks pushing Team 3D going heel, dropped them for a few weeks, and brought them in face as if nothing had happend before. This is one good thing that TNA creative staff thought up, but they lacked the skills to guide it to fruition.

    I would buy a WWE Women's tag title if proper time was given to it. Pretty much the same argument in the other direction; WWE has plenty of female talent, and certainly the air time on television each week to find room for it. WWE has a surplus of titles, however, and adding one more to it would just be crowding, whereas TNA still could devote time to it each week and not cut too far into the time for other segments and matches. And as far as women's wrestling is concerned, almost all of us have a favorite Diva or Knockout. I don't usually enjoy how it's presented on either promotion, but that doesn't mean I've never enjoyed a women's match before.

    It's unfortunate the timing of their debut, that's all. And the belts in their current state suffer from their use in past months. Taking time to develop identifiable tag teams and feuds would undo the damage done to the division. People need to see girls working hard to earn the belts, not showing up out of nowhere to challenge for belts that haven't been seen on tv in weeks. Belts that lose prestige can gain it back, in time.

    TNA is far from "ain't broke". There is always room for improvement, especially if you're an underdog promotion looking to carve your place into the big time. Even at this time last year, which is just before the belts were unveiled, TNA was not doing great business. They were still recovering from Victory Road 2009, hailed as one of the worst events of the year. If you'll recall, this was just after non-sense backstage including a change in power as Jarrett was swept out of creative and booking positions, taken off tv, and was involved in Kurt Angle's sticky personal life. Notice a pattern here? TNA can't keep things together long without big problems always coming up. So again, is it a flaw in the concept of the Knockouts Tag Titles that has hurt them, or is it TNA's mismanagement?

    That's just, like your opinion, man. In all honesty though, keep up the work. I look forward to continuing this.
     
  6. Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra

    Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra Kinda Sorta Old School

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    507
    The problems are everywhere really, but just looking at the concept of the belts I see flaws. Whether it's booked the right way or not it still doesn't make sense from a business aspect to split one of your most profitable commodities when it's never been done before. Ballsy, yes, but it was a risk they took and it ended up failing. The reason why I think it failed is because the women's division in wrestling has never been more than a supplement to the product as a whole, TNA tried to take a (for lack of a better term) sideshow and make it the main attraction.

    The reason tag divisions work in the men's ranks is because there are enough wrestlers on different levels, mid card, main event, under card, you know where I'm going with this. You don't have that in the KO division, every Knockout is a title contender, I don't know about you but doesn't it take away from the prestige of a championship? I'd say that makes the concept flawed.



    That's fair enough to say, but you can't tell me that if this wasn't billed as a Knockouts exclusive show that it would have had a better rating than that. 0.6 is terrible, simple as that, yet this is the division they wanted to split up and take more time away from the parts of the show people actually cared about.

    I don't agree with the way WWE runs their women's division, having two singles titles for two shows seems like a bit much for my liking. The thing is, yes people will watch women's wrestling, but they want to watch all the best go at it and have different fueds. The main thing I see people complaining about is the product being stale and the same people day in and day out. When you take a division and split it up you get the same girls going for the singles titles, while a bigger portion (at least 4) is going for the tag titles. That takes away possibilities for storylines and new fueds. Having 13 women isn't enough for 3 belts, that means 4 people going after each belt at a time, but even that is skewed a bit because the majority would be after the single's title leaving even less ladies to fight for the tag titles.

    Anyone they got from another promotion would just end up being a filler anyway, there's usually a reason someone isn't on the big show. Even if they were to call someone up, they wouldn't go directly into the title hunt. Well they might, this is TNA.


    You're right about everything you said here.


    I still can't see how someone thought that adding a women's tag division was a good idea. Men's tag teams aren't even that great, one good thing I will say about the women's version is that you don't have wrestlers getting pegged as tag team specialists and stunting their careers. It's only been a handful of mothes, but it hasn't hurt anyone's career in that aspect so far. Singles matches are what makes the big bucks, gets the best storylines, and makes the most stars. Women's wrestling just isn't strong enough to have tag team titles and suceed. You take two of the most boring aspects of wrestling and put them together and you get women's tag team wrestling.


    It's still not going to make any money in the WWE either, it's just a flawed concept. Like I just said, you take two things that aren't very good and you put them together. Two negatives don't make a positive.

    I'm with you on that I can't honestly say that I've never enjoyed a women's match, I just can't think of one. Everyone has liked a diva or Knockout, or whatever at one point or another, but I can almost certainly guarentee you that it wasn't because of a tag match.



    I know it's very early in the belts' lifetime, but I can't see them ever being used as a proper stepping stone to the singles title, for that the championships would need TV time every week and along with the singles title they just aren't ever going to get it. That's a big point to where the concept is flawed, if you can't give something the time to succeed, then why have them at all? Women's wrestling will never be a big enough part in the weekly programming to make these titles somewhat sucsessful.


    If the best part of your program is women's singles wrestling why would you want to change that? This is subtraction by addition here, by adding new titles to the women's division they subtracted KOs from one of the most sucsessful parts of the show, women's singles wrestling.


    As do I good sir.
     
  7. DirtyJosé

    DirtyJosé Best angle of all: retirement

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    1,175
    Though not entirely accurate, let's run with the number we have been of available women in TNA as 12 (10 contracted Knockouts, plus the two you granted me previously). That's one Knockout Champion, and two Knockout Tag Team Champions. That still leaves nine other Knockouts. Even if we limit each to only competing for one title or the other, that can be three other tag teams and three other singles wrestlers; more than enough to carry two undercard belts.

    For example, look at what many consider WWE's best tag team era, '99 to '01. The scene was carried by The Dudleys, Edge & Christian, and The Hardyz, with the New Age Outlaws/Degeneration-X usually in the scene with them. These four teams rotated in and out of the title scene, spending the time in between feuding with each other, or with other teams put together with singles wrestlers. Four teams may not sound like much, but when booked correctly four teams can revitalize a tag division.

    First of all, as I've pointed out above, it wouldn't take much of an update or increase of the Knockouts roster to facilitate enough girls for a singles and tag title. The whole of the Knockouts division would still only need about twenty minutes or so on television each week, something it would usually get until the start of the recent ECW angle. And again, when it has been shown to be one of the few reliable draws in TNA's arsenal, why not try and spice up the product?

    Secondly, and this is regarding the bolded text, TNA didn't really try though. Trying is not giving a talented Knockout a tag title, and then taking her off tv for four months. Trying is not forgetting the belts exist until you need a quick pop for some surprise factor on free television, in which case you give away another title change. A four hour Knockout special is not the answer when you've given the fans no reason to care. A four hour Knockout special does not undo months and months of bad booking.

    Quality over quantity, my friend. I'd say that the number of competitors isn't nearly as important to the prestige of a championship than the quality of the competitors. TNA has had plenty of misses when it comes to female wrestlers, but overall I'd say the Knockout Division is usually more interesting and full of more capable workers than the WWE's counterpart divisions.

    I think it would have stank regardless of the gimmick for the event. It was pre-taped way in advance, and was days before the big 1/4/10 showdown. Nobody cared about this show because even if it was full of nothing but male performers and title shots only, Hogan was coming and was going to change everything.

    I think you are limiting the booking potential of a hybrid Knockouts division. So you have singles champ in a feud with one, possibly two contenders, and tag team champions feuding with one or two teams at a time. That's still only nine people, out of our working figure of twelve Knockouts. That leaves three singles contenders, or an additional tag team, or a combination of both. Factor in that with resources like SHIMMER, capable and talented performers can be brought in to replace duds or injured girls, and you've got a sustainable pool of workers to keep feuds fresh. And remember that at any time a team can be broken up into two singles wrestlers, and that two singles wrestlers can be put together as a team. I think that's quite enough to keep what you call a "sideshow" varied enough to keep from getting stale.

    Many female performers never get called up to the WWE because they don't have the Barbie doll look that McMahon craves. TNA has a collection of female performers that ranges from typically sexy girls like The Beautiful People to unconventional looking but impressive women like Rosie Lottalove. Being more open to the different types of female performers available gives TNA an edge at scouting new talent from other promotions. And what's wrong with bringing in new talent? Sure, they require time and attention before they can be taken seriously, but isn't that how this business keeps going?

    Now we're talking about tag team wrestling in general, which is far from the most boring aspect of wrestling. The only thing I find boring in modern tag team wrestling is how each nationally televised promotion seemingly underutilizes their tag divisions. There was a time when the tag team matches were as much a part of the reason why I watched each week as the main event.

    But you see, you've been open in the past at some point to enjoying a good women's match. You just don't remember it because the story was stupid and/or unimportant. Or maybe because it was a feud played out over months infrequently on television, so you never had a chance to remember it as fresh ever. These are the obstacles I see to a successful Knockouts Tag Team Division, and fortunately they can be cleared by adjusting the support creative gives the Knockouts.

    The tag belts don't have to be a stepping stone only to the singles title. They don't even need to be a stepping stone for everyone at all. That is one use for it, sure, but there's nothing wrong with a few established tag teams. In fact, I think the division could use a time where wrestlers aren't just trying to step up to the Knockout Championship, but instead are dedicated to chasing the Knockout Tag Team Championship. Let a few teams make their name chasing the belts, and watch as that energy give those belts some meaning again.

    It's not subtraction if it's done right. Sign up two to four girls and there will be plenty enough to go around and feel fresh, while still not taking up a huge part of TNA's payroll or television time. The Knockouts Tag Title are still a great creative idea even if TNA botched it's handling.

    Your move, sir.
     
  8. Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra

    Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra Kinda Sorta Old School

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    507
    I really don't think that's anywhere near enough talent for those belts. It would get very old, very fast. Tag team A beats tag team B at one PPV then tag team A takes on tag team C at the next one and beats them too, who's next? Does tag team B get back into the title picture already? I say it get's old fast.

    http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/worldtagteam/

    We can look at those champions there^ for reference. I see what you're trying to get at with this but you see havin 4 tag teams takes 8 people, and if those wrestlers are breaking up after they lose the belt to go after the single's title the tag team loses credibility and continuity. If they don't break up after they lose the belts then it leaves the premier part of the KO division(singles) with only 4, and like I said when I gave you those extra two, it's streching it. Could you show me how to book it though? Because I can't seem to think of a way to make it work. I'd also like to add in that those thrown together teams were some top tier main eventers, something the TNA KO division doesn't have.

    Well the problem with just adding to the roster is you have to pay all thouse girls you add, and you have already stated that TNA has had disputes over pay in the past. Also I'd just like to say that women's wrestling isn't a big money maker by any means, so why spend more on something that's not going to give you a return on your investment? The fact is, the only way TNA will ever get better is if they concentrate on their banner championship, the TNA Heavyweight Title, money spent on the KO is money you're not spending on something that will actually make your product money. Biscoff made these types of mistakes before, he lived and died with the ratings being the most important thing, when in reality it's the PPVs and t shirts that help your company stay afloat, Knockouts don't produce either of these.

    The fact is, no matter what they would have been doing with the champions that special would have been a failure, you can't take a supplement to your product and try to make it the main attraction and expect it to work. These are reasons why I think the idea of having these belts is laughable, why would you spend more time on something that can't make you money?

    You need quantity to produce quality though, if you show Steamboat vs. Flair every week it's going to get old fast, even though the matches might be amazing, the repetition would be too much. As for the number of people chasing it, again I'll use the Steamboat-Flair example, say you have a divison with Flair, Steamboat, Savage, Sting, and Shawn Micheals all chasing for one belt. You know as well as I do that it would be great to see for awhile, but it would get old and you would lose intrest.

    I don't buy that for one second.

    I covered this a little earlier in my post a quick recap though would be that you don't invest in something that won't make you profit, this goes for time taken from TV and contract money also continuity with the tag teams would suffer if they're breaking up and reforming all the time.



    McMahon isn't the only one that craves that image, the viewing audience does too, granted they do want the woman to be able to wrestle. I see we're running into that tv time issue again, one thing I'll add is that yes, you always need to be trying to create new stars, but the amount of star power needed to sucsessfully run the KO and KO tag division would take awhile to create, and even if they had the roster for it, it does make back the money that they spent on it.


    I see it otherwise. I'm not a big fan of tag team wrestling, I'll just leave it at that.

    You're really helping my point here. Women's wrestling is forgetable and never gets any good storylines, why add more belts to something like that? All the good storys go to the moneymakers, the men. Even if a good story is going on most people will write it off because it's women.

    They don't have to be, no, but that's what an undercard title does. It gives the lower teir people something to do and is a stepping stone for the upper echelon to use to get to the top.


    I'm sorry, but if TNA can't even have it's big midcard title on TV every week then the KO tag titles aren't going to be getting that time and even if they do, it's not a good idea.

    Check.
     
    DirtyJosé likes this.
  9. DirtyJosé

    DirtyJosé Best angle of all: retirement

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    1,175
    Between four tag teams, assuming their feuds carry over two or three pay per views, a fresh title scene can be had for over the course of a year or more. Then take into consideration that as girls need time off for injuries or whatever other reason, new team can be made from singles stars, and new talent can be brought into the scene. It is the same pattern for every other division, where even if they have a bigger pool of talent to pull from, only three or four guys stay towards the front of the pack anyway.

    Well, you'd book it like any other part of the show. Ideally, you refrain from as many giveaway matches, keeping it to basic tag matches or singles matches with members of tag teams during the weeks between pay per views. You keep to a fairly strict and coherent structure for a time of who's in line for the title shots. This is help rebuild faith and interest in the division. The pay per view matches can add Knockout-appropriate gimmicks, such as a cage, or an alternate win condition such as submission. Even for an undercard match, give fans a reason to think that these matches are special. As I said above, the goal should be to generate angles that carry over two or three pay per views. As one angle winds down, the champions can move into an angle with the new contenders, while the losers can start back towards the titles again, or break apart into other things (like both heading into the singles division, or one takes time off while the other picks up a new parter, etc..).

    Bischoff knows the power of a good undercard; a solid cruiserweight division helped him propel WCW into the mainstream. The Heavyweight Division is the main event, but is not the entirety of the show. So what else do you do with the show? I admire the concept of the Knockout Tag Titles because they dare to break the convention of an undercard populated only by a women's title, and men's tag title, and various useless men's singles titles. A TNA Knockouts Tag Division is something that can't face comparison to "the WWE version", which is where a lot of TNA's problems stem from. The Knockouts Tag Title is a property utilizing what has already proven to be a draw for TNA in a manner that is entirely unique to TNA.

    I'm not here to defend a special program which was ill conceived in the first place, and I fail to see how the failure of that program is proof specifically of the Knockouts Tag Titles being a failure. Indeed, I find it further proof of the Tag Titles' bad reputation thus far being a result of TNA's management of them, and not of the concept itself.

    But that's what any main event scene is like; there are only ever three or four contenders to the title. Everything else is flotsam. People rotate into and out of the scene. People get injured. The TNA Knockout roster is not static, and can change over time rather easily. I think you are going about this by envisioning the same roster being booked over the course of a year and not taking into consideration newer stars being added to the mix. Did I mention that Mickie James is not too far from signing with TNA? Even if she goes into the singles division, that still frees up more people to enter into tag teams. Quality of the matches and angles trumps the quantity of them most any day.

    Making Impact a better show and creating angles to book pay per views around is hardly something that won't make you a profit. If anything, the Knockout division has only ever given proof that the Knockouts are a cherished and popular aspect of TNA. It would be foolish to ignore that. Also, I think that continuity will be just fine whenever a tag team break up is called for. Guys fight, make up, team up, break up, and fight again all the time, and we accept it all the same.

    Having a Knockouts Division full of stripper looking types takes away from The Beautiful People. Part of what drove me to ever watch TNA were the unique Knockouts like Kong and ODB, who could perform better than most and had an unconventional look to them. Daffney also falls outside the box of conventional looking female performers, and has developed a huge following for it. Just as with male performers, the Knockouts will benefit from having a varied and diverse assortment of wrestlers as opposed to WWE's cookie cutter Divas division.

    I feel this is dangerously close to sound Russo-esque. He felt a similar way about non-American performers, feeling that the crowd only ever wanted to see the big guys in the main event. If you see an area of weakness, are you better suited to ignore it, or try and improve it? If TNA were to just stick to the formula and ignore the Knockouts at every possible chance, they stand no chance of making any significant mark on the industry beyond what they have already accomplished. I feel that's it's a better decision to take on your weakness and make them into strengths. Women's wrestling in general, in it's current state, is usually forgettable because this kind of sentiment prevents any real innovation from being implemented.

    What I mean is that I feel you only see them as in contention for a title or part of team in contention for the tag belts, not as somewhere in between, tagging one week and going solo the next. Some people can stick to the formula as you see it, and some can float from one division to the other and back each week until something catches on for them in one.

    Like any other division in the company, the Knockouts Tag Division resource that can be utilized to improve the reputation and entertainment factor of the company. Whether or not TNA can ever learn to properly use these resources is a different discussion. I feel that TNA is better off improving and innovating in areas that are unique, like this is, than creating a vanilla wrestling experience as you've proposed with only emphasis on the Heavyweight Champion, and no growth in the Knockouts Division.

    We ain't done yet.
     
  10. Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra

    Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra Kinda Sorta Old School

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Messages:
    576
    Likes Received:
    507
    It sounds workable in theory, yet what hangs me up about your comparision is the fact that you're comparing the men's division, which is chock full of talent and differing gimmicks to the KO division that has (at the time being) a generous 13 wrestlers in it and will usually have around that number of girls working at all times. Another problem, which I've brought up numerous times is people in general don't care about women's wrestling. I was thinking about our debate the other day and decided to ask a few of my friends and co workers what they thought about women's wrestling in general. Their answers didn't bode well for the girls. I asked if they cared about seeing women wrestle in tag team matches, and brought up that TNA had a KO tag division and they said no. These are just a few friends of mine that don't follow wrestling as close as you and I do, but they make up the bulk of wrestling fans.

    Have you applied for a job with TNA? They could use someone with a little common sense. Again, like I said above it sounds good in theory, but the problem is getting people to want to watch that much women's wrestling.

    The cruiserweights had alot more things going for them than the KO's do. They were exciting and great workers, you can't compare the undercard of WCW to TNA's, it's laughable. The cruiserweights got people from all over the world interested and produced huge stars in the business. That is something the Knockouts will never do, or be anywhere close to doing. I also find it hard to believe that adding the KO tag belts would improve the ratings for TNA because WWE doesn't have them or because the girls are a high point for TNA so adding belts will increase that. If anything you just weakened a strong point of your company. I would be holding the same stance as I do now if WWE had a women's tag division incase you were wondering.

    I was only pointing out how women's wrestling draws. Like shit. The only way these belts can be considered a sucsess or even a good idea would be if the general public wanted to watch women's wrestling, they don't though.

    Kane and Undertaker has been done different ways different times with their fueds being spread out over the course of a few years, yet it's still the same old thing at it's core. Undertaker is a legend and Kane has been a stable of WWE programming for over ten years, yet when they have a fued people get tired of it. Take that and change out the legend and the staple, then replace them with the ladies. You know what you get? Boring TV. I only use them as a comparision to show that even if you get great workers that have huge fanbases and you even spread their fueds out over years people still get picky and don't like it.

    A good women's division doesn't get you that many extra PV buys. They are a supplement to the show, that's it. It's always nice to see a decent thing going on in the women's division but it's always just to fill some time til you get to the best part. A men's undercard match is far more interesting because they usually are the early stages of a main eventer and people are always interested in getting inj on the ground floor of something that could be big. Tha time they give to the Tag division should go to that. I'd also like to address the fact that the KO division's sucsess saying more about the product as a whole not being to the highest standards.

    Hey if you want to watch big girls that's fine with me. :rolleyes:

    I will say one thing that's food for thought. Tag teams are usually uniform teams, at least that's what I've found to be preferred by people. Yet TNA's women are all diverse and unique and you want them to be tag teams.

    I thought the KO's were a strong point? Wouldn't you want to work on your main event scene? You know the MAIN EVENT. The main event is what people come to see and the resources that TNA has put into the KO tag titles should have been spent on improving the moneymaker, not the supplement.

    Continuity.

    I'm not saying abandon your KO division, I'm saying don't add a set of belts that will not only take away from that division, but your show as a whole. WWE is a juggernaut, I think they've done a few things right over the years.


    I think we are. Since the time limit is up at 2 P.M. I'll go ahead and make my closing arguement now.


    Closing Arguement


    I've come to the conclusion that the TNA Knockout Tag Team Championships are a joke and not a good idea. Overall women's wrestling just doesn't make you money and making money is the name of the game and is what TNA should be focusing on. What people want to see is the main event and future main eventers, tag team wrestling in general was only to be used in the undercard and isn't the most popular, sought after thing in wrestling. Then you add in the mix that women are the ones doing the wrestling and it's just not going to be interesting to the general public. Having these extra belts floating around also hurts your overall product, because if you have to give two women's titles TV time that's less time that can go to the other divisions, the ones that make more money.

    All of these things are contributing factors in why the idea of having a women's tag team division isn't a good idea, in any company really.​
     
  11. DirtyJosé

    DirtyJosé Best angle of all: retirement

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    1,175
    Damn, I thought we could do this forever. Thank you Blue Cardinal for being a good sport and a great opponent. Good luck to you in the rest of the league.


    Closing Arguement


    I believe that the TNA Knockouts Tag Team Titles are a great creative idea that TNA still has yet to figure out how to use. If TNA wishes to hold any edge over WWE in the long run, it needs to develop a gameplan that includes going outside the box of traditional thinking when it comes to booking. A women's tag division feels to me like a good idea to develop as it combines a proven successful aspect of Impact with a concept that (to the best of my knowledge) hasn't been done before in a major North American promotion. This is the type on innovation that I want to see more of in pro wrestling. This willingness to turn convention on it's head is going to be what produces the next big thing in wrestling, not merely following the standards that were set by others.
     
  12. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    703
    Clarity of debate: DirtyJose
    Superb opening and kept on subject very well, nice thinking with the interpretation of the question, I felt BC did sway off a couple of times but Dirty did keep on well.

    Punctuality: Blue Cardinal
    While there was decent response times, BC was very quick to respond in comparison to Jose.

    Informative: Draw
    Hardly new information was given, while there was a fair bit used at the beginning, no-one really used information to back their cause effectively.

    Persuasion: DirtyJose
    I felt the moment Jose said that the topic was about the concept about the belts rather than the use, he really got himself going. No doubt that BC did give some great points, but I felt this was going about how the Knockout Tag Division was a joke (which I agree with) in comparison to the actual concept for the belts themselves. Had it been the former, I would have agreed with BC but as Jose carried his side of the debate with that stance he just edges over BC in this. A great debate but it was this element that did it for me.

    Final Score
    Blue Cardinal: 1.5
    DirtyJose: 3.5
     
  13. BooCocky

    BooCocky On A Nature walk with Daniel Bryan

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,536
    Likes Received:
    687
    Clarity of the debate. Jose had an opening OP. BC wasn't too bad. But he did get a little of topic. Jose attacked the debate. He was clear and concise. He gets the point.

    Point: Jose

    Punctual- BC was quick on the draw. Jose stalled a few times.

    Point: BC

    Information- I am saying this is a draw. I do agree with Phoenix. Not a lot of info was given. But gave some but no one went the extra mile. So I split the points.

    Points- Both

    Persuasion- I really didn't agree with anyone. But with BC swaying away and Jose doing his best to keep the debate on track I will give him the points. Jose carried his side well. BC did all right but at times he looked lost. Which really isn't being persuasive...

    Points: Jose

    Tally

    Jose- 3.5
    BC-1.5
     
  14. CH David

    CH David A Jock That Loves Pepsi

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    896
    Likes Received:
    768
    Shit I thought I judged this one. Must have been that night at work the computers were going really slow. Let's get to it.

    Clarity: DirtyJose had a very good opener. I enjoyed Cardinal's as well, but he wandered a little bit throughout the rest of the debate.

    Point: DirtyJose

    Punctuality: Cardinal was on time. Jose was late once.

    Point: Blue Cardinal

    Informative: Not enough new info was presented. Shame though, some good stuff in the beginning.

    Point: Split

    Persuasion: As Phoenix said, the concept of the titles are actually pretty good. When they were introduced last year the Knockouts were at the top of their games. Obviously we look at it with the Hogan/Bischoff regime killing any momentum they had, and now the entire division is a joke. The initial concept was good, but the execution, which I feel Blue was going after just hasn't been there.

    Points: DirtyJose

    CH David scores this DirtyJose 3.5, Blue Cardinal 1.5
     
  15. Cena's Little Helper

    Cena's Little Helper Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,495
    I don't like it when people put their opening arguments and rebuttal in the same post, so Blue Cardinal gets the point for clarity. As has already been said, Blue Cardinal was quick and snappy with his posts, so he gets the points for punctuality as well. In terms of informativeness, I'll go with Blue Cardinal again since he, objectively speaking, presented the most factual information. On persuasion, however, I'm going with Dirty Jose; I'll echo the same sentiment of my counterparts and say that he did a nice job rebutting and interpreting the debate topic in a unique manner that worked very well.

    Final Score
    Blue Cardinal: 3
    DirtyJose: 2[/QUOTE]
     
  16. Phoenix

    Phoenix WZCW's First Triple Crown Champion

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,630
    Likes Received:
    703
    After a complete judge's tally, DirtyJosé is the victor on 12.5 points to Blue Cardinal's 7.5.

    Congratulations and great debating from the both of you!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"