The policy that nobody important can lose a match

[Bernkastel]

What made Young the weakest Link. He clearly is better than slater and otunga. Hell Barrett tapped to the same guy in cena that young did. So wouldnt that make Barrett weak as well?

Because he lost... the NEXUS threw down the gauntlet last RAW, with the stipulation that any member that lost that night would be kicked out of the group. Young was the only member that lost, and thusly was kicked out...

Again, it's wasn't about establishing the strength of the individuals, but the group. NEXUS lost as a group at SS, and last RAW was spent reestablishing the strength of the group.

 

[Bernkastel]

I agree completely with your general idea. It seems like WWE refuses to let anyone go over their big names which is hindering the product because the only way they're going to make new credible main-eventers is by having the new guys prove they can beat the currents guys on top.

It makes no sense whatsoever for WWE to job out their main eventers in pointless matches. If they did this then a win over guys like Cena, Orton, or Sheamus (the current champ) would mean nothing... even on PPV.

This is why the WWE has midcarders like Henry, Bourne, and Ryder and midcard titles like the US and Intercontinental.

The WWE realized the hole they've dug themselves into these past couple years and are now scrambling to get younger guys over. But at the same time they still refuse to have their top dogs lose clean for fear of making them look weak in any way.

How are they scrambling? Guys like Kingston, Bourne, and Morrison are all over and solid midcarders... which is where they should be at this point in their careers. WWE hasn't done anything wrong...

Think about it: When was the last time John Cena lost cleanly 1-2-3? I'll tell you when. Last year to Triple H. When was the last time Triple H lost cleanly 1-2-3? Hell if I know. Now it seems like they're doing it to Randy Orton. He's been on an absolute tear through the roster and now looks unstoppable.

Cena and Orton are the two biggest faces in the company, of course the WWE isn't going to job them out.. a clean win over either of them is supposed to be special, not predictable.

Besides, Orton is the Number 1 contender; if the WWE jobbed him out, then no one would be able to take him seriously.

They need to realize that they can't constantly keep using Chris Jericho (even though he is the best in the world at what he does) to get everyone over by laying down.

Er, yes they can.. he's a heel... as a heel he's obligated to put over other talent. The benefit of being a mega heel is that the WWE can always reuse their characters, and make them legitiment again. Chris has enjoyed at least two world title reigns by doing this.

They need to start having some of the newer guys legitimately beat the guys at the top of the mountain if they ever want to create new stars we can take seriously. Trust me WWE, Cena taking a clean loss is not going to end his career but it will make someone else's.

Again.. midcard talent, and midcard titles... it the reason why they exist; to put over new talent.

 

[The Five-Star Frog Splash]

ugh, look, if the wwe was smart...............actually, I won't finish that statement because I could fit a dozen things in there.

But IF they WERE smart, and had the Nexus win at SummerSlam, they wouldn't have had to waste the entire show on cheap wins. But they did. And it did absolutely nothing for nexus. Nothing. Their heat is gone, momentum, everything. Because they could not win as a group at Summerslam, and they needed to win because they needed credibility. Here is where they lost the logic in just two nights. Okay, so if Heath Slater can defeat edge and Jericho by himself, why can't he do it again the next night? (sighs) In the case of Gabriel versus Orton, it didn't matter if Gabriel won or lost because it wouldn't have affected Orton in the slightest because he is at that Main Event point in his career where he can suffer a big loss or two (clean) and still come out okay because in all honesty, fans still love Orton. They still want to cheer for him and if the WWE feels the need to, can build him back up in a week or two. Here's where things went wrong with Nexus. They should have never let guys like Carlito or R-Truth beat the NXT guys one-on-one the way they did because if they can't beat mid-carders like them, who can honestly believe that they can 6 months later beat Randy Orton, when they haven't beaten anybody equal to or less than him in the time leading up to that match.

As for guys like Sheamus,(like originally talked about at the beginning of the thread) Yes, he needs a clean victory, just ONE against any main eventer to solidify him. And again, we wouldn't be talking about this if the WWE had booked this ppv properly, logically. But that's the norm in WWE now a days I guess. Anyways, the way that WWE makes Sheamus look as champion is awful for a few reasons. He can't beat a Main Eventer, cleanly. He's not credible. He has to have that proven track record of, "I beat you fair and square before." before he can be seen as legit. DQ's and countout victories won't help him at all in this reign. Sure, when he ultimately does lose cleanly, it will make the fans all the more happy. And yes, fans will pay to see the face champion and ratings can go up, BUT, how does Sheamus win it back without looking like before? He has to have clean victories every once in a while because DQ's will only get him so much heat, he has to get some on his own.

 

[drobs85]

Because he lost... the NEXUS threw down the gauntlet last RAW, with the stipulation that any member that lost that night would be kicked out of the group. Young was the only member that lost, and thusly was kicked out...

Again, it's wasn't about establishing the strength of the individuals, but the group. NEXUS lost as a group at SS, and last RAW was spent reestablishing the strength of the group.

Doesn't matter what day it was, they lost to the same person within 24 hrs. Also nexus did not lose as a group because barrett was the last one remaining. And since you say "group" then technically they all have losses, so whether it was Sunday and all members lost or Monday when one just lost albeit all were fishy victories except one monday, they all technically still have losses. So the whole concept on raw was stupid.

 

[mayankeagle]

A DQ or screwy finish does not hamper a rising superstar's push. Do you guys remember the Undertaker/ Edge feud over 2007/ 2008? Edge did not win one match cleanly against Undertaker, yet he rose to fame and that was the pinnacle of success in his entire career.

 

[dman1373]

randy orton can not lose right now. He is on the run of a lifetime. He is about to become bigger than sheamus could even think about getting. So a loss to a guy that people think is not a credible champion would ruin it. Randy Orton is like scsa circa 1998. If scsa would have lost cleanly then he would have lost alot of credibility. If you want to make sheamus look strong, fine. but don't use orton. Use triple h, cena, jericho, or edge. They aren't going any higher. Orton is on a monster push and is becoming the next wresting icon. I could even see him bigger than cena in a few monthes.

 

[Brahma Bull]

heels are not suppose to win cleanly. i dont get why some people on these boards dont understand. what do you mean sheamus isnt over? how many ppv's has he headlined or was involved in a championship match? didnt he face hhh at wrestlemania and then put him out of commision. sheamus is main event. they dont need to beat the faces cleanly. the only time you see faces beaten cleanly is in hiac matches, ladder matches, lms matches, etc. ones where they can use weapons and such. this has been done since at least the attitude era. face main eventers are not suppose to loose cleanly to heels unless their the constant underdogs (hardy, rey.) they dont need to put them over that way.

and even though i got annoyed with all the matches since they werent that good (i can see why they are always together) they were done well.

jericho (heel) lost cleanly to barrett in a great match that could have gone either way. and barrett won nxt, is leading the nexus and is going to be in the main event. he needed a big win and is a convincing person to beat jericho. and the gm making barrett face jericho makes me think that there is more to the match than meets the eye.

the tarver bryan fight was suppose to further the bryan miz fued, thats all

gabriel orton was suppose to further orton sheamus. there is no way in hell orton should have won cleanly to gabriel. that would have been a huge wtf moment.

the tag match had a clean (somewhat) ending

the edge slater match had one of the better endings imo since it showed that slater outsmarted the ultimate opportunist

then of course super cena wins, but w/e

 

[Str8 Cash, Homie]

It's funny cause I was just thinkin about this same thing a while back. It seems like the only way any of the top stars n the WWE lose cleanly these days is if they lose to other top stars.

Also, my question is what was the point of kickin Young out the group? Like, what's he gonna do now? But I think the best course of action would have been to just have Nexus beat Team WWE at SS because now, unless some crazy twist takes place sometime in the near future, it looks like no matter what they do, Nexus will look weak against Super Cena and his little team.

But anyway, back to the subject at hand. The thought that having top stars lose cleanly makes them look weak is flawed. To me, havin top stars lose clean every now and again helps establish the fact that they aint perfect and still can lose at any given time. Look at Jericho, truthfully, do any of you think any less of him since he lost to Wade Barrett clean? Would you have thought any less of Orton if he Sheamus went over clean on him? Remember when Triple H did the job to Shelton Benjamin back around '04? Did it hurt Trips 1 bit? No. All it did was help establish Benjamin's name in the WWE. Top stars really have nothing to lose by losing clean.

But thats not the way WWE sees it. The way they see it, a top guy will look "weak" if they lose cleanly. So now, you're stuck with Super Cenas and what looks like Super Ortons runnin around lookin invincible just because management thinks they'll look weak for losing in non-cheating fashion.

 

[Mark0820]

What I saw were six men scoring six wins for the strength of their faction; my point that was that everything the NEXUS does, they do as a group. Whenever they act as individuals, they do so to enhance the appearence of the group.

And they didn't enhance the appearance of the group because half of them won with outside help. They couldn't get it done on their own. That's the point you can't seem to grasp.

As a group they dominated one match, and nearly defeated an All Star team in the main event at one of WWE's biggest PPV.

A match of lower card guys and one guy older than their dad's. And they didn't nearly defeat the WWE team. It was 2 on 1 at the end and Cena squashed Gabriel and Barrett within 60 seconds of each other.

I don't understand what you're trying to say...NEXUS is also a faction that has been built up as a legitament threat to everyone on the roster. All of those others factions also acted as a unit at one point or another during their existences, so I'm not seeing the difference between them and NEXUS.

They've been built up as a legitimate threat as a group. Any 6 guys put together would be a threat anyone on the roster. Only Barrett and Skip have cleanly beaten anyone on the Raw roster. The rest won by outside help or stupidity on the former 9 time world champion's part. Those factions acted as a unit, but what made them strong was the fact that they didn't need help from the rest to win matches. They were capable of beating anyone on any night by themselves. That's what made them dominant.

How? 6 out of the 7 members won their matches, how is that not making the group look strong?

Because 3 of those 7 won by unclean finishes. Otunga only won because he was in a tag match. There were two clean finishes. DQs or count out wins thanks to outside help do not enhance the talent, especially after they are getting dominated in the ring up to that point.

NEXUS is still being billed as a cohessive unit. When the strength of the individuals begins to outweight the strength of the group, that's when the faction begins to crumble... that was the downfall of all the other factions you just mentioned. Eventually that will be the downfall of the NEXUS as well, somewhere down the road, but as of right now they are still being billed as a group.

No, it wasn't the downfall of any of those factions. Have you even watched those factions? Every successful faction has had strong individual members so when they came together no one could stop them. Have you ever heard the phrase "a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link"? If you have weak links up and down the chain the chain will snap quickly. The Nexus chain was shown to be weak and unable to compete with the Raw members consistently.

Factions have a leader and underlings. Even with Barrett as the leader, he has stated that the strength of the group is equal... and that the strength of the group as individuals... is also equal.

If everyone is equally good in the group, why did he throw down the gauntlet? Oh that's right because he felt there was a weak link!

The whole point of last week RAW was about reestablishing NEXUS's strength as a group; a cohesssive unit... not as individuals.

It was about re-establishing Nexus' strength as a group, by making the individuals look strong. How is this that difficult of a concept to grasp?

If it was about the individuals, the NEXUS would have turned on Barrett, and not on the weakest link of the group, Darren Young.

Why in the blue hell would they turn on Barrett? They flat out said that if Barrett lost he would have been out also. I think we're watching two different wrestling programs.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

It's a little thing called booking, ever heard of it? It's not quite the same as the creative aspect, but they are closely related. One without the other wouldn't make sense, which leads me to my point:

There are guys on the roster at the moment that have a character direction, momentum and history. Sheamus is a person that has been known to look VERY dominant and pose a legitimate threat to anyone, including John Cena... but when it comes down to crunch time, something just seems to happen that allows Sheamus to win by never does it cleanly... keeping the mystery and questions going in the fan's mind as to whether Sheamus really is all that dominant. Take his match with Orton for example. At this point in time, Orton is someone who literally can't be stopped... yet Sheamus is a dominant individual who is perceived as someone who can't be stopped. How do you book the match if you want Sheamus to keep the title? Fuck up the finish somehow so one keeps his title and the other looks strong.

It's like the matches with Nexus this week. The stable is given the perception that they are invincible and have taken out many people at any given moment. They have hardly been in matches to keep the momentum rolling as these guys were rookies on a program that heavily implied that notion. You can't have someone who didn't even win a rookie competition defeat the most dominant person in the E... if they want to keep the rookie with some momentum and win, they have to fuck up the finish to get the rookie the win and make the other guy stay on the same level in terms of credibility.

Booking may seem like a bitch sometimes and gets you frustrated, but that's how it's supposed to work. You get agitated because the bad guys clearly deserved to lose yet they keep getting the victory somehow. The E is doing a fine job too, considering the backlash I've seen (with the OP poster using headbanging smileys).

 

[Bobby B]

It's a little thing called booking, ever heard of it? It's not quite the same as the creative aspect, but they are closely related. One without the other wouldn't make sense, which leads me to my point:

There are guys on the roster at the moment that have a character direction, momentum and history. Sheamus is a person that has been known to look VERY dominant and pose a legitimate threat to anyone, including John Cena... but when it comes down to crunch time, something just seems to happen that allows Sheamus to win by never does it cleanly... keeping the mystery and questions going in the fan's mind as to whether Sheamus really is all that dominant. Take his match with Orton for example. At this point in time, Orton is someone who literally can't be stopped... yet Sheamus is a dominant individual who is perceived as someone who can't be stopped. How do you book the match if you want Sheamus to keep the title? Fuck up the finish somehow so one keeps his title and the other looks strong.

It's like the matches with Nexus this week. The stable is given the perception that they are invincible and have taken out many people at any given moment. They have hardly been in matches to keep the momentum rolling as these guys were rookies on a program that heavily implied that notion. You can't have someone who didn't even win a rookie competition defeat the most dominant person in the E... if they want to keep the rookie with some momentum and win, they have to fuck up the finish to get the rookie the win and make the other guy stay on the same level in terms of credibility.

Booking may seem like a bitch sometimes and gets you frustrated, but that's how it's supposed to work. You get agitated because the bad guys clearly deserved to lose yet they keep getting the victory somehow. The E is doing a fine job too, considering the backlash I've seen (with the OP poster using headbanging smileys).

I'm getting agitated because the bad guys are being booked in the way they are. We've seen this formula all to often with the likes of Edge in the past, and now it's Sheamus' turn. It's boring. I don't want to see the invincible face against the cowardly heel. I want to see two guys who both have a chance of winning, but at the same time both have a chance of losing. That's how it should be booked.

Sheamus is in desperate need of a victory - he hasn't had a clean win yet in any title match - because they dare not make the faces look weak. Oh no - you can't do that. He beats John Cena at TLC last year - by having Cena fall through a table. He then retains by DQ a couple of weeks later, beats Orton by DQ at the Royal Rumble, then loses the match at Elimination Chamber. Not once did he ever look strong during any of these matches.

His second run. Wins the title at Fatal 4 Way thanks to interference from the Nexus (so Cena doesn't look weak). He retains at Money in the Bank thanks to help from the Nexus (so Cena doesn't look weak), he then loses to Randy Orton at SummerSlam via DQ (so Orton doesn't look weak). I'm getting bored of it, really really am.

Yes, I guess it's good booking. But Cena and Orton don't need to saved by screwy finishes every time they lose.

It's good booking, but it's shit television.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

I'm getting agitated because the bad guys are being booked in the way they are. We've seen this formula all to often with the likes of Edge in the past, and now it's Sheamus' turn. It's boring. I don't want to see the invincible face against the cowardly heel. I want to see two guys who both have a chance of winning, but at the same time both have a chance of losing. That's how it should be booked.

If someone gets a clean victory of another person in a feud as high-profile as this, then the feud is pretty much over unless the other person can quickly get a clean victory and remain exceptionally dominant for the next few weeks. That's how a feud usually goes, right?

I'm sure you missed the fact that if Randy Orton lost to Sheamus, he would not receive another championship shot again. With pretty much all of the main event guys being occupied by Nexus is some form or fashion, they couldn't allow Orton to lose under the stipulations, thus the reasoning why Sheamus retained and Orton won the match. They want these two to continue, as evident by Sheamus coming out and interfering in Orton's match (also giving a second reason by allowing Gabriel to win, with the added third reason of allowing Bret not to look bad by wrestling someone with a good wrestling presence). It's all done for a reason and when the pay-off comes... the impact will be HUGE.

Sheamus is in desperate need of a victory - he hasn't had a clean win yet in any title match - because they dare not make the faces look weak. Oh no - you can't do that. He beats John Cena at TLC last year - by having Cena fall through a table. He then retains by DQ a couple of weeks later, beats Orton by DQ at the Royal Rumble, then loses the match at Elimination Chamber. Not once did he ever look strong during any of these matches.

Have you forgotten that Sheamus has taken out Triple H, the baddest man on the planet? That man is impossible to defeat, and Sheamus has sidelined him.

That's the story of Sheamus' life. Everyone is in the state of mind that Sheamus can beat anyone, but something seems to happen in the end. When the stipulations finally come to that he has to win cleanly, the E will pull the trigger and make him look good. As for now, he can continue doing what he is doing and allow the other ME guys to still look good. You can't give away the ending before the blow-off.

His second run. Wins the title at Fatal 4 Way thanks to interference from the Nexus (so Cena doesn't look weak). He retains at Money in the Bank thanks to help from the Nexus (so Cena doesn't look weak), he then loses to Randy Orton at SummerSlam via DQ (so Orton doesn't look weak). I'm getting bored of it, really really am.

The booking is to make you feel like this. You're a fantasy booker yourself, right? You should know not to give away some match results so quickly as it could eliminate the possibilities of a feud down the line. Sheamus is still quite young and has the rest of his career to make a proper feud with Cena and Orton... so why give it away now?

Yes, I guess it's good booking. But Cena and Orton don't need to saved by screwy finishes every time they lose.

It's good booking, but it's shit television.

Please tell me of another way that the E can book Sheamus keeping his championship whilst not diminishing the credibility of someone like Randy Orton who has been built to be unstoppable, taking into account what both men have been through together and individually. If there is something else I'd like to hear it.

 

[Bobby B]

If someone gets a clean victory of another person in a feud as high-profile as this, then the feud is pretty much over unless the other person can quickly get a clean victory and remain exceptionally dominant for the next few weeks. That's how a feud usually goes, right?

In the way WWE books most fueds - yes.

I'm sure you missed the fact that if Randy Orton lost to Sheamus, he would not receive another championship shot again. With pretty much all of the main event guys being occupied by Nexus is some form or fashion, they couldn't allow Orton to lose under the stipulations, thus the reasoning why Sheamus retained and Orton won the match. They want these two to continue, as evident by Sheamus coming out and interfering in Orton's match (also giving a second reason by allowing Gabriel to win, with the added third reason of allowing Bret not to look bad by wrestling someone with a good wrestling presence). It's all done for a reason and when the pay-off comes... the impact will be HUGE.

Yeah, I agree with that too. I still think Orton should move to Smackdown come October. And if the WWE felt that way too. They could have easily have had Sheamus go over Orton, and then given Sheamus any one of a number of new opponents at night of Champions - Edge or Jericho (who've both been playing tweeners in recent weeks), or Barrett. Or even a guy like John Morrison. It's not my fault that the WWE only have two face stars on Raw who they feel can be in the main event - and they don't want either one ever to lose a clean match.

Have you forgotten that Sheamus has taken out Triple H, the baddest man on the planet? That man is impossible to defeat, and Sheamus has sidelined him.

No I haven't, but that didn't involve a title belt. I'll say it again, Sheamus has never won a clean no-gimmick title match yet. You shouldn't be able to use a non-title feud to justify a man being a weak champion. If anything Sheamus going over Triple H should mean that he is capeable of beating both Orton and Cena.

That's the story of Sheamus' life. Everyone is in the state of mind that Sheamus can beat anyone, but something seems to happen in the end. When the stipulations finally come to that he has to win cleanly, the E will pull the trigger and make him look good. As for now, he can continue doing what he is doing and allow the other ME guys to still look good. You can't give away the ending before the blow-off.

As I said at the bottom of the last post. I get the booking, but it's happened in the last 3 Pay-Per-Views that Sheamus has needed outside help to retain his title. How long is it before logical booking becomes repetitive and boring?

The booking is to make you feel like this. You're a fantasy booker yourself, right? You should know not to give away some match results so quickly as it could eliminate the possibilities of a feud down the line. Sheamus is still quite young and has the rest of his career to make a proper feud with Cena and Orton... so why give it away now?

Well if you don't feel Sheamus should be in a position to beat Orton. Then do one of two things:

1) Don't give Sheamus the belt in the first place. I get heels going over in a screwy finish every once in a while, but if you don't have the confidence that he can beat Orton or Cena - then don't do it. Put the belt on Edge or Jericho instaed.

or

2) Don't put Orton in the match. This was the 4th match on a six match card at Summerslam. The Nexus match was selling the PPV - so why not feed Sheamus a John Morrison, or an Evan Bourne or somebody like that. All of the upper mid-card faces in the company are on Smackdown (Christian, Kofi Kingston, Rey Mysterio, Big Show).

Please tell me of another way that the E can book Sheamus keeping his championship whilst not diminishing the credibility of someone like Randy Orton who has been built to be unstoppable, taking into account what both men have been through together and individually. If there is something else I'd like to hear it.

As above. Don't put Orton in the match, or don't give Sheamus the belt. You didn't have to, and that certainly wasn't the plan. It was going to be Sheamus HHH, with Orton in Team WWE. If you now need to keep the belt on Sheamus because you're waiting for Triple H's return. Then give Sheamus a mid-carder he can beat. With the Nexus vs WWE match, you could have still stacked all of your big players in that match (as they were planning to in the first place).

Yes Sheamus vs Evan Bourne for the WWE title wouldn't have been the best selling match on the SummerSlam card. But it's not my fault that WWE booked such a crap card outside of the Nexus main event.

 

[Bud78]

As a 20 plus year wrestling fan I really have no problem with the DQ's. If any of you had watched wrestling for more than five minutes you would understand that DQ's and count outs have been used in the exact way they were on Raw for many more yearsthan you have been alive. THey are used much less frequently now than they were in the eighties. For the guy who was a fan in 1995 the same goes there. DQ's and count outs have occured all through history and have been used to get people over a bigger star. I think it is a bit of an overreaction by many of you. The Nexus won their matches and they can maintain their stable. Some of them looked strong some of them got lucky, that's how it works sometimes. I don't agree with the Orton Sheamus DQ as I don't care for them on PPV but that used to happen ALL THE TIME as well.

If you look back int he history of the WWf you will see that stars are rarely beaten and in the past they would only be beaten on PPV and even then it was rarely a clean victory. Honky Tonk Man ring a bell to anyone. Relax, calm down and quit bitching.

 

[billm75]

I honestly think all the backlash against this past Raw was because there were SO MANY DQ/Countout wins for the Nexus members in one night. Had they decided to stretch this out over, say, 3 weeks of Raw, putting one or two matches on the card, it wouldn't have seemed so hokey. BUT, since they dedicated the entire night to Nexus vs. RAW and because they couldn't dismantle the entire group in one night by having them lose, they chose to go the route they did.

I have to say it got boring seeing Gabriel, Slater, Otunga, and Tarver winning, but that was the only way they could keep it going past this week. You gotta let them win somehow, let them kick Young to the curb they way they did and I wouldn't be surprised if he changes his tune, tries to get back in the good graces of the RAW locker room and helps them to beat the Nexus down, one by one.

 

[A**hole]

Nexus could only lose 1 match to maintain the group, another will leave soon and so on until they get to 4 members.
Given the storylines how much would it have sucked if 6 won clean?
Could you have put Bret in a six-man tag match so Orton wasn't dragged into it?
It wouldn't have matter who Orton (or Shamus) had a match with it was always going to end in a DQ/countout due to the other interfering so to sub him for Bret helped that storyline along to and also offered the chance for the GMs teaser
The only weak finish was Edge, that sort of countout is weak for edge, it's more how he will have a cheap win

Reading this thread has made me think of the some similarities to the Radicalz apart from the Sheffields resemblance to Perry Saturn. Not all that group made it to the mountain top and most of Nexus will struggle to make it to the upper midcard

 

[Bobby B]

Nexus could only lose 1 match to maintain the group, another will leave soon and so on until they get to 4 members.

I'm not totally sure of that. I think it's possible that the Nexus mop up one or two from NXT season two (not the winner) - but maybe Michael McGillicutty and Husky Harris?

Given the storylines how much would it have sucked if 6 won clean?

It would've sucked, but not half as bad as it sucked as the way they did it. Having them lose at Summerslam wasn't a stupid decision (although it was odd). They needed a way of getting heat back on The Nexus - and they didn't do that Monday.

Could you have put Bret in a six-man tag match so Orton wasn't dragged into it?

You could've just not used Orton. Evan Bourne would've put on a great match with Justin Gabriel.

It wouldn't have matter who Orton (or Shamus) had a match with it was always going to end in a DQ/countout due to the other interfering so to sub him for Bret helped that storyline along to and also offered the chance for the GMs teaser.

It felt rushed. If you'd have spread this Nexus interrogation over two weeks, you could've have had a few long matches, and not felt the need to squeeze this segment into a match like this.

The only weak finish was Edge, that sort of countout is weak for edge, it's more how he will have a cheap win

No it wasn't. Edge's was probably the weakest of the three. But the Orton countout, and the Tarver roll up weren't exactly strong.

Reading this thread has made me think of the some similarities to the Radicalz apart from the Sheffields resemblance to Perry Saturn. Not all that group made it to the mountain top and most of Nexus will struggle to make it to the upper midcard

Barrett will be a main eventer. Sheffield has the look that could take him a long way. Gabriel has a chance, although his mic work is lousy. As for the other 4 - I don't see a big future for any of them (however much they try and push Heath Slater).

 

[nbda1997]

Am I missing something here? Should I be keeping a score card every time I watch wrestling? Of course not; in the grand scheme of things, wins and losses don't really make that much of a difference as it regards to the elevation of new talent. People got behind Austin and The Rock not because of an impressive win/loss record but because they were entertained by both men. No one laid down for either one of them until they proved that they had what it takes to be huge stars.

As a wrestling fan, I've always lived by 3 rules of thumb:
1) Be able to suspend disbelief
2) Have a short memory
3) Remember that the fourth wall isn't there.

I don't have to explain about suspending disbelief. I keep a short memory, because I don't want to take into account something a wrestler did a year ago (or sometimes even a month ago) and let it taint my enjoyment of whatever they're doing now. Finally, I always keep in mind that there's got to be a method to the writers' madness. By removing the 4th wall, I can analyze each performer on a deeper level than who he's beaten lately. It all must be taken into account; how well he sells his storyline; whether or not he's able to connect with the audience, and yes, how well he works his matches.

Anyway, my point is that even pretending to rate wrestlers according to who they've beaten or jobbed to lately is just stupid. It isn't real... The results are pre-determined. Just enjoy the show for what it is and rate each wrestler in terms of how well they entertain you.

 

[Fisheatppl]

Hey this is my first post. I think billm75 said it best when he said it should have been done over 3 weeks, or at least over time. Watching Justin Gabriel “win” and then almost immediately watching Heath Slater “win” (I don’t actually remember the order) was ridiculous. I didn’t even watch the tag match, I knew what was going to happen. And to echelon, everyone else is right, the greatest stables all had tough guys. Almmost everyone is established as a tough guy, or a winner. If you were walking in the back, and Batista from evolution walked up to you, you would be scared. If HHH walked up to you from DX (when HBK was in charge in the late 90’s), you might not be scared, but at least intimidated. Most of the members of the stable would intimidate you ALONE. Barret can do that. Shefield… maybe. Only because he’s big not because of anything he’s done. If any ONE member of Nexus walked up to any superstar (excluding Barret), they would laugh at them. And after Raw this week, nothing changed that. They appeared as weak as they did from losing at Summer Slam.
Also, it would have been much more pleasurable if JOHN CENA wasn’t the one to get the only win. Even if it was a DQ, it would have been more exciting to see someone else do it. I knew Darren Young was done for the moment he spoke. And if Jericho wasn’t the one defeated(or only one), it would have helped. Everyone knows Jericho is a guy used to get others over. Even people who don’t understand what that means weren’t surprised Jericho lost. But if Barret beat Edge? Believable. Then you could have had Heath Slater (as useless and annoying as he is) beat Jericho and it wouldn’t be a stretch. Now they seem tougher. Then the Justin Gabriel thing could play out the same way, and no one would have thought different, it would have been the only “screwjob” ending. But they were SO CLOSE together! (although I much preferred the angle of Evan Bourne vs. Gabriel, whoever said that was genious).
And at the end of 2+ hours, I realized I had wasted my time just watching a drawn out reason to get rid of Darren Young, and to show how Cena is the “heart and soul of the WWE” for the… I dunno, about a millionth time. \
And really, if we wanted to show Nexus was still strong, why didn’t they just win at Summer Slam? I was completely surprised by the ending. Now the story seems stale. “We are the most destructive force in the WWE!!!.... eeexcept for you guys who beat us. Oh I know! We play the numbers game but we need to lower our numbers. NOW we can beat you 7!”
As for SummerSlam, and specifically Shamus. I 100% completely agree he needs a real win. The whole “remember the stipulation about Orton not getting another shot” argument is complete trash. The “creative team” PUT that in there. They could have left it out. Heel HHH can beat people, heel Rock could beat people, heel Randy Orton could beat people, the whole point is that it is just unbelievable. When they said “If Orton loses he can’t get another shot but Shamus… NO ONE CAN INTERFERE” I thought “that was dumb, why didn’t they say if he DQ’s he will lose the title, or a no DQ match?” I agree they could have used a mid-card. Hell, they could have used Miz, had Shamus dominate Miz (who never uses his contract), and Miz loses. Adds some fuel to Miz’s fire, maybe a degree of whoever he wins the title from “he can’t be me(shamus)!” in the future. They didn’t NEED to have Orton be the #1 contender then.
Just a lot of points where the creative team could have helped to make the fans believe what they were selling. which is "Nexus is dominant, Shamus is champ." But right now, the fans feel, or see, Nexus should not be on the main event, they are not really a threat in a true competition. Shamus can’t handle winning, also couldn’t be a threat in real competition (which we all truly know, deep down, he really is). Don’t really know how to end this here though… I just keep going on and on.

 

[drobs85]

A DQ or screwy finish does not hamper a rising superstar's push. Do you guys remember the Undertaker/ Edge feud over 2007/ 2008? Edge did not win one match cleanly against Undertaker, yet he rose to fame and that was the pinnacle of success in his entire career.

Edge had already rose to fame before then, try matt hardy fued with lita, try him beating john cena for the wwe title somehow. Were all those matches clean victories, not sure.

 

[Y2J-LionTamer-Y2J]

And how much credibility does Justin Gabriel get by beating Randy Orton by DQ? If you don't feel he's ready (which is right) then don't put them together in the match in the first place.

The thread was started more about the main event picture - although it timed in very nicely with the screwjob finishes on monday too.

I think the point is being missed here guys and gals.....

The point off Raw period was to build fueds and ultimately kill off Darren Young.

The match your talking about had no more to do with Justin than the fact that he is staying in Nexus.
This entire thing was set up just to build between Orton and Sheamus.
That was the bigger picture.They just needed a way to keep JG around and it fit perfect.

As for the Edge match I really have no clue...
Put Wendy over him clean. Who cares? Edge has not been relevent since he returned. He is being booked so badly that I could see him loseing to Slater....
Not Edges fault,just bad booking.

It has been discussed here many times how valuable Jericho is.
You see he is a main event talent that unlike Orton who can't lose even by a distraction roll up pin to someone like an NXT rookie,Jericho can.
Wade being leader and winning NXT aside I think Jericho is the only talent that can give him clean momentum by pinfall at this point and make Wade look damn good doing it.Jericho is always down to help talent out.
Lately he made Evan Bourne look strong FFS.

Not even Edge can do it as you said but Jericho also jobbed a quick match to Slater on NXT season one and also made it look good.