Sunday Bloody Sunday

[TheOneBigWill]

What are some of the better feuds that didn't actually have to resort to using blood? Do you feel those feuds would've been better WITH blood? My final thread idea (for now) related mainly to viewing the Hart Family saga.

I believe the Bret Hart v. Owen Hart, Cage match at the 94 Summerslam was good.. but the one element of it that would've made it even better, would've been blood. I really believe a feud THAT heated deserved to see someone get busted open. Could you imagine seeing Bret Hart or Owen Hart covered in blood, fighting with fists on top of the cage? It could've been one of the best sights ever!

Staying with why I believe it would've served a better purpose in that feud, I truly believe that any type of Family saga/drama would only end in the worst way possible. A lot of times, whenever a match is drawn into a bloodbath, it's because it's heated and filled with tons of hatred. This feud was everything perfect for that type of setting, but it had a fricken PG rating because of (I believe) the time period they were in. If that feud happened in today's world, one or both would be busted big time in that match.. and one or the other would bleed on a weekly basis from backstage/behind the back assaults.

At any rate, that's my opinion on a feud that could've been even more intense WITH blood. But this thread also gives you the option of explaining why a feud that involved tons of blood, didn't need to as well. You can go either way, be sure to explain why you feel how you do, and how the blood or lack of would've benefitted the feud between whomever.

 

[Shocky]

Tough question, and I think that most of this would be centered squarely on mid-90's feuds. A feud like Andre vs. Hogan would have been killer with blood involved to show the intensity, but it wouldn't have been practical, and really would have felt out of place at the time, considering how kid friendly the programming was. And essentially every major feud from the Attitude Era until now has had someone gush open on pay per view.

I would say that Hart vs. Michaels would have been killer. I never ever remember Bret bleeding, minus the Piper match me thinks. I'm not sure if that was in his style of storytelling or not. Michaels blades like no other though. The intensity of the Screwjob probably would have been tenfold if a bloody Shawn Michaels was in the Sharpshooter, and then the bell rings, tons more fuel to the fire for that situation.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Tough question, and I think that most of this would be centered squarely on mid-90's feuds. A feud like Andre vs. Hogan would have been killer with blood involved to show the intensity, but it wouldn't have been practical, and really would have felt out of place at the time, considering how kid friendly the programming was. And essentially every major feud from the Attitude Era until now has had someone gush open on pay per view.

I agree that while it was majorly lacking from the early 90's era, it would've also seemed randomly out of place. I remember one of the first time's I seen someone bleed, was actually Hulk Hogan against Sgt. Slaughter, I believe at Wrestlemania VII. That was honestly the greatest thing possible for a storyline of that type.

I mean, Slaughter was horrible bar-none. But the role he played, and to "bust open America" as it were, only for us to "comeback" and overcome the odds. It was one of the greatest storyline play-outs I've ever seen.. and it sickens me to say it was because of Hogan playing it off.

One feud that could've used blood, but never (to my knowledge) did would've been Randy Savage (as Macho King) against the Ultimate Warrior, also from Mania VII. I think seeing Savage drill Warrior with like 4 elbows only to lose killed him.. but if Savage would've been a bloody mess doing it, then to lose.. it would've said.. "Hey, he hit his finisher with ALL the power he had, but the amount of blood loss showed that he just didn't have enough left in the tank." And after that, to see Liz show up.. a bloody Savage, broken, and after that match "fired".. it would've told a much larger story.

Speaking of Savage, I seem to recall a small amount of blood in the Ric Flair/Randy Savage feud, but with knowing how Flair is a master at bloodbath city.. to know their W.W.F. feud from 92 didn't have more in it.. disappointing, at best.

I would say that Hart vs. Michaels would have been killer. I never ever remember Bret bleeding, minus the Piper match me thinks. I'm not sure if that was in his style of storytelling or not.

The first time I recall him (Bret Hart) bleeding was Mania VIII, against Piper and I'm unsure if it was planned or accident. While that was okay, I have to say the greatest match Bret's EVER had in which he bled.. was against the British Bulldog from 1995, at the December In Your House.

Again, accidental or not I have no clue, but Bret bled BUCKETS upon BUCKETS! He was pouring blood on the mat outside the ring, and when they came back in, blood stains where EVERYWHERE.. in the end, Bulldog was covered in Bret's blood, the mat was soaked, and Bret was a total wreck. Greatest blood match.. ever, for Bret Hart.

Michaels blades like no other though. The intensity of the Screwjob probably would have been tenfold if a bloody Shawn Michaels was in the Sharpshooter, and then the bell rings, tons more fuel to the fire for that situation.

I agree. That was H.B.K. and Hart's last feud. Even if Hart's storyline was used, he wasn't wanting to drop the title to Shawn, period. So why not let the match add blood. The Canadian fans would've ate it up to see H.B.K. soaked in his own mass.

 

[2012isbs]

I think the Rey mysterio and Chavo guerreo feud could've used blood because they were fighting for the same mans honor. They both made the other say i quit and the would have destryed each other in that feud.

Another feud that blood would be nice touch is Jeff hardy and Orton. Jeff said he'd take orton out and does a 50 ft. swanton but doesn't even give orton a nose bleed at the royal rumble.