We don't need blood baths, but there needs to be MORE Blood in important matches

[RKO18]

Watching Cena/Umaga from Royal Rumble 2007. You may not remember but Cena blades hard in this match and it adds a lot of emotion to it. Cena looks like a legit underdog at times and its mostly because of the "laceration" as J.R. would say.

Now I don't think blood has to be shed at every PPV like it has at times in the past, but more like it was in 97/98. It was used just enough at that time, and usually at the climax of a fued.

So when (and they will someday) the WWE allows blood in its matches again, how often do you want to see it?

 

[hellod245]

I am not blood favour fan but still you need blood to show that this match is nasty.

Ok lets see what ruined the main event of wrestlemania, HHH vs Orton ? It was personal, it had a huge buildup but still nobody paid attention to the match. It was so personal that wwe wud have to use blood in that match to show that these two are going too far to beat each other so bad instead wwe showed that HHH care more for the tittle than his family and his wife ???????????? Orton vs Cena (HIAC or I quit or Iron man match), in every mactch something was missing and it was blood.

Matches like Hell in a Cell and Elimination Chamber lost their value just because it dsnt seem now that brutal because of the absence of blood. Yes its true that blood is not important in every match or every feud but in some matches it become so much important to make match a whole lot better. Imagine that Umaga vs Cena (LMS match) without blood and you will find that it was crap.

 

[rayisawesomeness]

In some ways, the usage of blood should be used but at the same time, it shouldn't. The obvious reason to which it shouldn't be used is because the show is more kid friendly and it wouldn't make much sense to have wrestlers bleed at every PPV or something. However, it should be used for feuds like Shawn Michaels/Chris Jericho or Triple H/Randy Orton. It can really make a feud seem very personal and emotional. Just go back and watch Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho at GAB '08, it really boosted the match and the feud.

 

[gully side adidja]

of course you need blood it happens in every physical sport, so if vince and creative want to create the illusion that wrestling is in indeed legit more blood need's to spill, i mean the amount of times wrestlers punch each other in a match, if it were real life, people would be bleeding already, what is one of the most iconic moments in wwe history, that's right bret locking the sharpshooter on austin at wrestlemania, austin in agony with blood pouring out, so i say more blood, holla.

 

[extreme mike]

I think blood should be used but only in huge feud ending matches. It just adds emotion to the match and makes it seem more realistic. I dont see the harm in using just a little blood once in a while in the wwe. I have seen blood in other pg programming, why is the wwe so strict against the use of blood? Gee a little blood spilling from some guys mouth wouldnt do any harm

 

[bucks8897]

Although I'm a fan of blood and think that it brings a huge factor in main events I agree that wrestling should NOT promote their guys to bleed in their matches.

I believe its a health hazard for the guys to be bleeding all over each other all the time and can't be safe for them. Don't get me wrong I understand wrestling is not safe and look at all the things that wrestlers put their bodies through on a night to night basis. Thats just as bad of a health risk as a wrestler "blading" himself. I think in the big picture though you have to look out for what can possible happen to your guys if you let them bleed all over each other. I'm no medical expert by any means but blood borne pathogens, etc that has to be a serious health factor and if WWE is "forcing" these guys to cut themselves in order to make their product more gory than that sends a really bad message.

All and all I agree with everyone about blood giving and extra element to a big match ending a good fued, but in my opionion the WWE should NOT promote their guys to blade themselves in matches. It's one thing if it happens by accident in the course of the match you can't avoid that but you can't promote them to do it on purposes, it's just not safe.

 

[Blade]

In my opinion, blood is never actually needed. It's used to add emotion to a match where the wrestlers aren't good enough to display the emotion needed themselves. When a wrestler can really deliver emotion, it's simply not needed.

Bret vs Owen never needed blood in their feud. No blood at Wrestlemania X or Summerslam because they could get enough emotion out through their perfomance. HBK and Angle didn't bleed in their Wrestlemania match cause it wasn't needed. The Rock rarely bled. Why? Because he was a good performer and didn't need it.

Blood doesn't always make things better. In fact, it only makes matches better on very very rare occasions. And I never saw the appeal of watching a human cut himself and allow the blood to trickle down his face, to be honset.

 

[The Doctor]

I believe blood could be used sparingly to add impact and emotion. Look at the Cena/Orton Iron Man match, which had an accidental cut. It added to it. At the climax of a big feud, blood can add some impact and add to the story.

It shouldn't be used ridiculously. Blood should rarely be seen, so that it doesn't lessen its impact when you do see it.

 

[gd]

Blood is really overrated in wrestling. Sure, it kinda looks cool sometimes, but there is really no reason for it.

If a match is completely shit, you aren't going to make it better by simply gushing blood everywhere. The fans will still realize it's a train wreck and the match will be as boring as it would without blood. (HHH/HBK HIAC).

Furthermore, you can have a great match without a single drop of blood at all. There are about a millon more things you can do in a wrestling ring that are more exciting than blood (Punk/Hardy).

I don't get the whole blood adds "intensity" thing. What does that even mean? If you can't bring the intensity yourself, that's your fault. You shouldn't need blood to do so.

 

[BladeRunner]

For those who don't like blood for whatever reasons, there's always fake blood. No blading necessary.

That's always the main thing people have against it is the blading or whatever. But it doesn't have to be bladed.

Also, if blood naturally happens by getting hit by the corner of something, then so be it. Let it go, let it bleed, unless it's so hazardous as to put the guy in danger from blood loss of course.

I'd like to see a balance. No blood is too little, blood all the time would be too much.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

For those who don't like blood for whatever reasons, there's always fake blood. No blading necessary.

That's always the main thing people have against it is the blading or whatever. But it doesn't have to be bladed.

Also, if blood naturally happens by getting hit by the corner of something, then so be it. Let it go, let it bleed, unless it's so hazardous as to put the guy in danger from blood loss of course.

I'd like to see a balance. No blood is too little, blood all the time would be too much.

I agree 100% and advocated the use of blood capsules for quite some time now. They are 100% safe, the talent doesn't have to permanently scar up their fore-heads (so they can actually have a life outside of wrestling) ... and if done properly, wrestling fans would never know the difference. Obviously, this information would need to be kept under tight lock, as if wrestling fans find out that real blood isn't being used, they will RIOT! Bunch of savages.

But yes, I do think blood is imperative for a select few matches throughout the year. It adds that special element of drama that regular high-profile matches simply can not produce.

But blood capsules is the way to go.

 

[jayteeERA]

Yes, blood should be brought back in wwe. I agree HHH/Orton feud was a waste cause nobody bleed. Same goes for Cena/Orton and HIAC and EC matches. They lost their value and IMO they aren't interesting anymore, only if a title is involve.

Without blood HBK/Undertaker first fued woudn't never been so epic. Stone Cold woudn't never been where he was if he didn't bleed all over while being in a sharpshooter. As far for bret hart and owen hart they didn't need to bleed they were both technical wrestlers. Yes it would of made their feud more intense but they didn't need it.

Blood makes matches more realistic. with punches being thrown, chair shots, personal feuds goin on they need it. Not all matches but some of them needs it.

 

[Tastycles]

Blood is pretty unecessary in most instances. When every single Ric Flair match reverts to blood, it completely removes any impact it may have had. We've seen with the Bob Orton incident, which could have been much worse, that blood is most unsafe. Blading is dangerous and it ends up scarring wrestlers pretty badly, just look at D-Von Dudley for the evidence if you need it.

That being said, it does make cage sorts of matches look a bit better, but I still don't think you necessarily need it. If they do have it, there's nothing that a realistic capsule can't do that carving a hole in your face can, so I reckon that the status quo is pretty much ok, to be honest with you.