TV Time Limit

[Thriller Ant]

I watched some old WCW matches on youtube this week, and I also watch Raw. Now, I'm sure if you watched Raw you saw the counter in the corner during the first hour, showing how much time was left until the WWE Title Match. I personally always try to watch shows fully in kayfabe. I appreciate a good match, but I want to see what happens with storylines, and be surprised if there is a swerve. But the counter ruined it for me. If this is a live show, with no time limits on the matches, how do they know when the match will be? Will they end the previous match to stay on schedule?

I mentioned youtube because I watched a great match with the then-TV Champ Chris Jericho defending his belt against then-Cruiserweight Champ Kidman from Nitro back in the day. It was a great back-and-forth match, with both men failing on finisher attempts. They had gone to the outside where Kidman worked Jericho over, and right as Kidman rolled him back in to go for a cover, the bell rings. The bout was ruled a draw due to TV time limits, and Jericho kept his belt. Kidman left frustrated, and Jericho survived with his reign intact.

The two are connected because having that TV time limit would have brought the kayfabe back into the counter in the corner of my screen. If the clock says 20 minutes, and the time limit is 10 minutes, then I know that I have this match, and probably some backstage segment before the match begins.

So, my question to you: TV time limits, Deal or No Deal?

 

[klunderbunker]

I'm against them. For the most part, time limits mean nothing to matches. It makes the show seem far too structured and gives it less of a feeling that anything can happen. The clocks are stupid to me because it implies taht the finish is known and there's no doubt that the scheduled match will go off without a hitch. Now back in the old school days, I remember on WM 3 Vince saying that the world title match was "about" one hour away. That's fine with me. he says about. He never says exactly 63 minutes from now the bell will ring or anything like that. It takes away from the unpredictable nature of the show and makes it feel more scripted, which is an element that makes wrestling unique.

 

[Thriller Ant]

That's true, I guess another argument I have for it would be a different finish. They could give away the PPV main events, but with the time limit, there would be a different way to end it rather than the run-in we see all the time. Or, like in the Jericho/Kidman match, Kidman was never at TV Title level. He was a great cruiserweight, but never moved up higher than that. However, in that match he took Jericho to the limit, and it really looked as though he would win the TV Belt. So not only can you get rid of DQ finishes, but it is a solid way to put people over without having someone lose a match.

Here is the match, btw:

[youtube]41vN-0Tgp8E[/youtube]

 

[Slyfox696]

One of the greatest travesties in wrestling, in my opinion, was the removal of time limits in matches. I have ALWAYS been a big fan of time limit in matches, just as long as the time limit is 20 minutes or more. Time limits are a GREAT way to keep a feud going, without hurting either wrestler. It allows a heel to keep his belt without winning, a waning clock gets fans on the edge of their chair, and, most importantly, why not have them?

For example, let's say the HHH vs. Orton World Title match from Wrestlemania had a 60 minute time limit. What would hurt? It's not like the match HAS to go 60 minutes, but if it had gotten closer to the time limit, then it just adds excitement to the matches.

I'm all in favor of time limits, as long as it's 20 minutes or more.

 

[Thriller Ant]

So, Sly, what about the 10 minute limit in the match I posted? I understand 20, it being a good length for a match, and it obviously not having to last that long. I feel like the 10 worked in that match, but it might not all the time. I totally agree with the extending of feuds. It is such a good way to give a lower-level guy a rub without ruining a upper-carder.

I must disagree with you on the pay-per-view matches, or at the very least, limits on matches at the big 4 PPVs. Those are the feud ending matches, and they need an outcome. If a match at The Bash would end by time-limit, I would be disappointed but okay since it is only The Bash. At Wrestlemania, however, I would be pissed if I paid the money for the main PPV of the year, and it ended by time-limit. I understand the added drama, but there is a huge cop-out opportunity that I'm afraid creative would take advantage of.

 

[Slyfox696]

[QUOTE="Lionheart" Thrill Jericho;1155632]So, Sly, what about the 10 minute limit in the match I posted?[/quote]I didn't watch it.

I remember back when TNA was on FSN, and they'd have a 10 minute time limit, and I always felt it made the matches too predictable. Many normal undercard matches go 10 minutes, and it's just not enough time to really get drama.

I must disagree with you on the pay-per-view matches, or at the very least, limits on matches at the big 4 PPVs. Those are the feud ending matches, and they need an outcome.

And most will. It's not like having the time limit will change having an outcome. But a well done time limit match can be very exciting.

At Wrestlemania, however, I would be pissed if I paid the money for the main PPV of the year, and it ended by time-limit.

But, it wouldn't. They never would do that. Try to remember that, even though there's a time limit, the WWE still books the match. But think about how exciting it would get if they got towards the end of a 30 minute time limit match at Wrestlemania, and you're thinking...will they really end with a draw?

It would add drama.

 

[Thriller Ant]

I didn't watch it.

I remember back when TNA was on FSN, and they'd have a 10 minute time limit, and I always felt it made the matches too predictable. Many normal undercard matches go 10 minutes, and it's just not enough time to really get drama.

A shorter limit like that wouldn't be there for drama, as far as I'm concerned. I'm thinking more as an alternative to the DQ finishes we see all the time now.

And most will. It's not like having the time limit will change having an outcome. But a well done time limit match can be very exciting.

But, it wouldn't. They never would do that. Try to remember that, even though there's a time limit, the WWE still books the match. But think about how exciting it would get if they got towards the end of a 30 minute time limit match at Wrestlemania, and you're thinking...will they really end with a draw?

It would add drama.

I think I better understand where you are going with this now, and I like it. I've watched a lot of matches where that sense of urgency, like 'I need to pin this guy NOW, or else I will lose.' A time limit would bring that back. I think we are on to something here.