Tracking Wins & Losses.

[Max Headroom]

Some people say wins & losses don't matter in the WWE today, whilst some do. It seems rather clear that some of the decision makers in the WWE seem to think in the mindset of the former, as they've had people such as Wyatt & Ambrose take much more losses than they should have, with the thought that it wouldn't affect (effect?) them. However, to me, it seems obvious that when someone loses more often, they also seem to lose their sense of direction. For instance, Wyatt winning against Undertaker at WM could have done wonders for him. Similarly, Ambrose NOT losing in salty ways so often at the end of last year would have done him a lot better.

To broaden this, in real sports, wins & losses matter a lot. What's the main thing wrestling should be trying to do? Seem real. Seem legitimate. Make you care about the people involved. I think a way to make things seem much more legitimate would be to track seasonal wins & losses. You can keep a full-time record, but the main thing of importance would be the wrestler's record for the current year. The "season" would end after WrestleMania ends, and a new "season" would begin on the following RAW, where everyone has their seasonal record reset to 0-0-0. Maybe even add an extra column for losses via interference, or other fishy things. You can then follow the wrestler throughout the year, and get a good view on how he/she is doing overall.

Not only would this add a lot of legitimacy to the current product, it could also make underdog/dominant superstars that much more noticeable. Imagine going into WrestleMania, and looking at the wrestler's record before each match. Having a wrestler hold a good record of 32-8-10 (for example) go against an underdog with a lesser record of 10-30-10 could make the story of the underdog seem that much more real. Likewise, having two wrestlers with the exact same records, or at least nearly the same, would make the match seem that much more unpredictable.

So, what do you all think? Do you like the idea? Is there anything you would add to it? Discuss, my friends.

 

[TheICChampion]

But what would all those wins and losses do, other than tell you how good/bad that superstar is in a staged contest? If there were something on the line, say the one with the most wins(which would pretty much always be Cena) would get a title shot against whoever the WWE champion is at 'Mania, then MAYBE it might work. But that would make the Royal Rumble pretty much pointless, wouldn't it? What other possible purpose would knowing how many "wins" or "losses" a superstar has serve?

 

[benm1989]

They kinda don't matter imo
Take Naomi for examples pins the divas champ twice
Then they make a battle royal for no.1 contender ship
Yes she is that now but it made it seem like the wins meant nothing

 

[Mustang Sally]

To broaden this, in real sports, wins & losses matter a lot.

(imaginary interview with LeBron James):

Walt Frazier: LeBron, why do you think you won tonight?
LeBron: Walt, I think we won because we scored more points than the other team.


That's the essence of it. In real sports, victory or defeat is determined by the numbers, whether objective or subjective. In pro wrestling, there are so many ways to win/lose that I don't see attempting to measure them as having much value.

When Rusev beats John Cena by kicking him in the family jewels, Cena loses, but his rep doesn't suffer because he didn't really lose....not in the eyes of the fans watching, since 15,000 people (plus millions more at home!) saw how it happened...... except for the one guy who counts.....the referee. So, it's marked as a loss on Cena's record, yet it means nothing in terms of his ranking.

In addition to winning/losing by foul, a wrestler can be disqualified, counted out, pinned, submitted..... and so on.....and the win/loss can be brought about by an unlimited set of circumstances, many of which boggle the mind for their inventiveness or degree of lunacy. How all that could be incorporated into a ranking system is impossible to figure.

At any rate, my answer is that tracking wins and losses wouldn't really accomplish anything, although I can appreciate the original thought advanced by the OP; it would be nice if things could work that way.

 

[Mudlup50]

I like the idea. I took a quiz on Sporcle maybe back in January and one of the questions was what 5 guys won the most matches in 2014 in WWE. The answers actually surprised me(Usos, Ziggler, Cena, and someone else) and I think it'd be crazy for the WWE to track this openly. Suddenly Wins and losses would matter.

You'd have an avenue for guys to turn heel in the mid part of the "year" so they can get their wins up. Maybe have the 3 worst guys "fired." Best 5 guys get a shot at the newly restarted Elimination Chamber PPV(if they moved it towards Extreme Rules). For these reasons, I'd be all for it.

But! There is always a negative, last year Swagger lost so many match(he lost like the most last year) and towards the Rumble they gave him another feud with Rusev. Which for gimmicks makes sense, but it would have been insanely unbelievable if we tracked the stats.
Swagger: 6-40-8 versus Rusev: 54-0-2. Or whatever they were, on paper that match looks otherworldly predictable now. Granted the feud was, but still you don't need to remind the fans which wrestlers lose a lot.


Granted, I'd say give it a try for a year or so just to toy with the idea

 

[Navi]

If they actually started tracking wins and losses, then they would have to start playing fair. No more interference, no more run ins, no more beat downs or 5 on 1's. Since that's not about to happen, I can't see any tracking system being put into place.

Look at Ambrose, the guy hardly wins anything and the fans love him. Compare that to Cena to wins everything and is hated by the majority for that reason alone. Part of the drama is hoping that Ambrose will win his next match, or that Rollins will get what's coming to him. In a staged sport there are no winners or losers, it's all about the storyline.

 

[Woodstuff]

Unless a wrestler is undefeated, wins and losses don't matter in wrestling. It's all staged. Dolph Ziggler lost 90% of his matches in 2013, and went on to become a big star in 2014.

The only people that care about wins and losses in pro wrestling are grown men with too much time on their hands.

 

[FromGlasgow]

I think wins and losses are more irrelevant now more than any other time as I remember people more for how good their match was and not actually who won or lost, I guess if they start to consistantly lose they can appear as a bit weaker equally they can appear stronger if they consistantly win.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

Nope. Wouldn't work.

The beauty of professional wrestling is that almost anyone can be be made to look a legitimate challenger to a title at any time if booked correctly, and a storyline can be put together out of the blue giving anyone a shot at the gold even if a wrestler has been on a "losing streak". Tracking wins and losses would stop this from happening, and as it's a scripted show there's no point in doing it.

Fans know the top guys win most their matches, the mid-carders can flip between winning or losing depending on their storyline/push and how much focus is on them, and the lower card acts lose constantly and are enhancement talent for the bigger stars. That's all thats needed in my opinion.

 

[JoeFromTomsRiver]

Win/Loss records have never been a part of pro wrestling (unless someone is un-defeated as has been mentioned). I see no need for it. When a guy is going to get pushed after being an enhancement talent for a while, what benefit is there to showing that he used to lose all the time, and now all of a sudden he's winning?

I'd be more inclined towards a "ranking" system of some kind, rather than W/L records. Although TNA tried that and it was a cluster F.