Would you pay to see a PPV end in a COUNT-OUT?

[johnmountain]

You got to watch this:
skip to: 9min 41sec
[youtube]g2ucO0lxPM0[/youtube]

The hosts were arguing about Alberto Del Rio vs. Big Show ending in a count-out from WWE Main Event and if that's what people pay to see. It further continued to the question of John Cena vs. The Rock at WM29... and it got me thinking, would people happily pay to see that end in a count-out or any PPV main event for that matter? Would the shock factor be worth it or would the finish just come off lame and unfinished?

At this point, I can only imagine people throwing their remotes at their TV screens if WM29 ends in a count-out lol

 

[The Brain]

The title of the thread is a little weird because by the time a match ends in a count out I've already paid. I didn't watch the video but I'll chime in. There is a huge difference between a match on ION television that most people don't watch ending in a count out and the main event of WrestleMania ending in a count out. There is nothing wrong with a match ending in a count out to further a storyline or protect someone's character. It can happen on any free television show without a problem. It can even happen on some pay per views as long as it's fairly obvious the story will continue and give us a rematch. I remember being surprised that Brock Lesnar and Undertaker ended in a double count out at Unforgiven 2002. The fans were booing but I didn't have a problem with it. It was their first match and the feud was obviously going to continue. The next month we got the brutal Hell in a Cell. That's a good example of the count out working. However, the main event of WrestleMania should never end in a count out. That's the climax.

 

[Swarles Barkley]

While not a count out, the HBK-Taker match at Ground Zero in 1997 ended in a no contest. It was the last match on the show and the first between Taker and Michaels, so it was a surprise to see it end in a no contest.

But we all know that this feud continued and culminated in the very first Hell in a Cell match at Badd Blood that October. I don't remember being mad that the Ground Zero match ended in a no contest, nor would I have been upset had it ended in a countout. I don't think the main event of Mania should end with a count out - that'd be like the Super Bowl ending in a tie or forfeit - but a countout finish can be used to further a rivalry, so I wouldn't be mad if the main event of a PPV ended in one.

 

[RKOrob]

You know what, I would have admired the balls of WWE Creative if Cena-Miz at WM27 ended in the double count-out they had before The Rock restarted the match. Rock's interference overshadowed the rest of the match and the huge win for The Miz, although understandably so

 

[The Butcher]

The title of the thread is a little weird because by the time a match ends in a count out I've already paid.

Glad the first response straightened that out, as the title presents a real conundrum. That's why he's The Brain folks.

There's little chance I would pay for a PPV whose main event I knew the ending to, whatever that may be. I wouldn't ask for a refund if a PPV ended in a count-out, though. I'd just complain on here and stream like the next 5 PPVs. I think that'd be the reasonable response for an IWC'er.

 

[legendkiller1979]

This has happened before. The main event of Summerslam 1993 ended in a count out.
This was huge at the time. This was a time when there were only five pay per views a year and the king of the ring was brand new. Getting a pay per view meant much more than it did today.

I get why they did it. They wanted Luger to win the belt at Wrestlemania X. Still it was pretty rotten to end such a major show in such a way. I think the WWF realized this because they treated it like Luger actually won the belt. They dropped confetti and paraded Luger around the ring like a conquering hero.

So to answer the question, it would not be a big deal today because pay per views today simply don't mean very much. Even if the show ends that way, you only have to wait a couple of weeks to get the rematch.

 

[tonykegger]

what about Rock vs. Mankind at Valentine's Day Massacre. That had a double countout ending but it was a good match.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

There's a huge difference between a main event match ending in a count out on free television and one ending on a ppv people spend $45 to $55 to watch. A pay-per-view event is supposed to be where things come to a head in a feud between wrestlers. If the feud is ongoing, as most are, then it's where fans expect to see some sort of payoff for tuning in each week to watch WWE television.

Cheap endings are generally fine for television as long as they don't pile them on too often. A match ending in a count out on television can be used to give a wrestler a win while protecting the other one and to keep a feud going. Putting those kind of endings in a match on ppvs pisses people off, and justifiably so.

Not all that long ago, TNA frequently had matches on ppvs in which matches were won by count out, DQ or just a time limit draw. As I said, such things are fine for television but it pisses people off when they get matches with such endings on ppv. For instance, not long after Bobby Roode won the TNA WHC, he & AJ Styles had a 30 minute Iron Man match at a ppv, I think it was Genesis or the ppv they used to have following Genesis. Anyhow, it was the main event and they went 30 minutes without declaring a winner. They "continued" the match the next Thursday. Fans, insiders and even many hardcore TNA fans all blasted the company for that. If you're going to deliver such a major payoff on television, people wonder why they spent $35 for a ppv.

There's no way you could know a match would end before buying the show, but such an ending to a main event match could piss people off to the extent that they don't order a show next time.

 

[LSN80]

Perhaps poorly worded, but I understand the idea. Would I be satisfied having spent my money on a PPV ending in a double-countout? No. That's lazy booking. Its something you can get away with on TV, but not in the main event of a PPV.

We, as human beings, are conditioned to want winners and losers. In the four major sports, only American football can end in a tie. The National Hockey League used to be that way, and while the way they decide their winner(by shootout) is flawed, they get the point. Winners and losers. I can give the NFL a pass, because of the wear and tear on bodies. But in the playoffs, NFL games keep going until we have a winner.

PPV's are like the playoffs of professional sports. In the example you used, you asked if it was possible for people to come out of Rock vs Cena II happy with a countout. Wrestlemania is considered the Super Bowl of professional wrestling, and can you imagine people being happy if the Super Bowl being called in a tie? I know, technically, a count-out would still be a win, but in major matches, especially the main event of Wrestlemania, definitive winners and losers are important. It would be insulting to the audience to do otherwise. All the storyline build, the promos, the matches that lead up to that....wasted. It's a sign of bad faith to the audience, and if creative can't come up with a better ending to the biggest match on the biggest show of the year, there's something very wrong there.

It's fine on TV, it can be used, in fact, to build towards bigger. But what are you building towards if it happens on PPV? Nothing.

 

[Wolf Pac]

I get why they did it. They wanted Luger to win the belt at Wrestlemania X. Still it was pretty rotten to end such a major show in such a way. I think the WWF realized this because they treated it like Luger actually won the belt. They dropped confetti and paraded Luger around the ring like a conquering hero.

I liked the count-out finish. I think that match was more about American pride for Luger than the WWF Championship, so that's probably why it ended that way, which made sense so long as he won for America. In the rematch, they made it look more like it was about the WWF Championship for Luger.

Anyway, I bought Unforgiven 2002 on DVD knowing that the PPV ended in a count-out. If I could buy a wrestling PPV DVD knowing that outcome then I would definitely pay to see a live PPV that ends in a count-out though I wouldn't actually know that beforehand. I wouldn't be pissed about it either as long as it made sense to the feud, like setting up a rematch as others have said. If it were used in a feud-ending match or at Wrestlemania, that would be plain dumb. I like count-out finishes in the main event of a PPV, they rarely happen and are always used to further a rivalry. When they aren't used to further a rivalry like TNA have done on some occassions that's when I hate it.

 

[Jerichoholic8894]

Well, if I knew the result before hand I wouldn't pay at all, unless I knew my favorite superstar was going over in the title match.

But I think I understand what you were asking, and i'd be upset if it ended in a count out after paying $60 for it, unless it either:

A) Made sense (To keep a streak alive and keep the title on the champion, etc)
B) It added to the story (If someone made a return, or helped someone in an unsuspecting turn of events)

but in theory, no I wouldn't want to see a count out, even if that meant another John Cena victory.

 

[EastCoastFan]

For years, before prime-time TV and monthly PPV's became the norm, it was not unusual in the territory days for the main event to end in a countout, DQ, draw or "Dusty finish" because that allowed the promoter to book a rematch between the two participants with some kind of stipulation to prevent another ending like that (cage, lumberjack, no CO/DQ, ...).

The philosophy of having an ambiguous ending in the main event in order to sell a rematch died with the rise of pay-per-view in the late-80's and early-90's, as buying a PPV often cost more than buying a ticket to a house show and fans felt short-changed by endings like that on a PPV.

 

[Judah's Lion]

i don't mind seeing a dq/count out/draw/time limit expire/etc type finish in matches. i don't even mind seeing it on ppv. and in very rare circumstances, i don't even despise seeing it in the main event of a ppv.

i can remember Triple H/Rock fighting to a time limit draw on ppv. it made me furious. Rock held the IC title and Triple H had the pin, but the time expired before the 3 count. the difference? though on ppv, this was not the main event. and the finish created the right kind of emotion. i was angry, but mostly cuz i so wanted to see Triple H win the title back. the result? i tuned into Raw the next night and saw the setup for Rock/Triple H ladder match at the upcoming Summerslam ppv. good booking.

but there have been many bad examples of this. first to come to mind is Mania 8, Hogan/Sid. totally unacceptable for a main event at Mania. there have been 3 draws that i can remember as a result of a Last Man Standing Match: Foley/Rock, Taker/Batista, Triple H/HBK. they all ended with both men down and unable to answer the 10 count. if i remember correctly, 2 of those 3 were not the main event of the ppv. they were all for the world title, but Triple H/HBK was followed by the Royal Rumble Match and Foley/Rock was followed by Austin/McMahon in a Steel Cage Match. in every case, those feuds continued and rematches were booked/feuds concluded.

as in so many cases with professional wrestling, i think the answer is often times a combination of "depends" and "moderation".

 

[FlairFan2003]

If you buy a PPV based only on the final match, then either you are a huge fan of one the wrestlers or the product as a whole really sucks and your a sucker for paying that money. In the first scenario anything other than your fav winning will disappoint you and make you question why you spent the money. In the 2nd scenario you'll be disappointed no matter what because the product sucks and likely wont hold your attention while you wait for the main event. Also, sometimes the last match isnt the biggest match on the card, it simply has the ending that WWE feels will send people home with the emotion they want. Taker-Edge was not the biggest match of WM 24, Taker-HBK was the most hyped match of WM 25 though yet it didnt close the show. In essence, just because a match ends a show it isnt necessarily the biggest match.

Now, its fairly common for undercard matches to outshine the main event. Taker-HHH was the best, most entertaining match at each of the last two WMs but didnt close the show. Rock-Hogan & Taker-Flair both overshadowed HHH-Jericho at WM 18, Flair-Savage & Hart-Piper were each way better than Hogan-Sid ending WM 8, Savage-Steamboat was a much better match than Hogan-Andre at WM 3. If you are feeling cheated because the last match didnt have a clear pin or submission ending, do you also feel cheated when undercard matches are more entertaining than the final match ?

Finally, if a count out finish bothers you on the last match, what about when the heel cheats and wins in "screwjob" fashion ? Do you feel cheated when CM Punk clearly cheats his way past John Cena, or do you enjoy the quality of the match and look forward to the storyline progression that results from the finish ?

If the over all show is good, then a non definative match finish on the final bout doesnt ruin the show. I can also tell you in my opinion one or two really good matches can save an otherwise lackluster show. WM 27 would have been a complete fail for me if not for HHH-Taker, WM 28 offered little beyond HHH-Taker & Cena-Rock.

I'll be much happier with a count in the last match of the night (provided the end result drives the storyline somewhere) on a balanced, entertaining show than I will with a definative, clear cut pin or submission ending an over all lousy show.

 

[johnmountain]

Sorry for the crappy wording. I meant, would you be happy you paid to see a main event end in a count-out? Seems like you guys understood it lol....

 

[TeddyCJD]

Would i pay to see a PPV where the main event ends in a count-out?

Well, if you are watching the PPV, presumably you have already paid for the PPV, so it is fairly irrelevant whether you agree or disagree with the ending. It is like going to the cinema, and the movie you go and see it shit. Why should the cinema care? They already have your money!

Would i be statisfied with a count-out or DQ finish in a PPV main event?

Possibly, under the right circumstances. I would love Rock v Cena at WMXXIX to end in a count-out...that way the WWE Title is not around the waist of John Cena, and that is always a good thing. The Taker v Lesnar double DQ at Unforgiven served to set up their Hell in a Cell match...so i have no issue with that. The Luger v Yoko finish at SummerSlam 93 was cheap as fuck though, and although i was never a Luger fan, i felt he had all the momentum in the world at the time, and should have got the strap. It irritates me when you hear guys like Jim Ross on the Legends Roundtable say that Luger was a bust and a failure. I mean, this is a business where results are pre-determined for fuck's sake! Was Luger supposed to go rogue on Yoko to win the title? How the fuck are guys supposed to run with the ball, if they are not given it! Anyway, im off topic, so rant over!

To clarify...yes, under the right circumstances (Unforgiven 2002) - a non-finish can work just fine at a PPV main event!

 

[origanaljerichoholic]

Here's the thing, no matter what were going to watch, it s like whats his name said,
we would just all get angry throw the remote, here we go next week and we keep watching, a double countout can only be pulled off based on the rivalry and good timing or if no one sees it coming OR if its something ridiculous like falling off the tron haha

 

[origanaljerichoholic]

They absolutley will, everyone talks about how wwe gets worse, yet what do they do? regardless of bad results, shit storys or bad bookings they keep watching and the fan base grows bigger and bigger

 

[Mustang Sally]

While I prefer clean results in any match.....PPV or not.... I can appreciate that today's pro wrestling world needs to occasionally feature matches that end in non-definitive fashion, for storyline purposes. Back in the day of Bruno Sammartino, Bob Backlund and Hulk Hogan, challengers for the world title got a once-a-month shot at winning it. If you lost, you went to the back of the line, working to try and build yourself up again for the right to face the champ (Yes, there were exceptions to that rule). Even then, there were plenty of sketchy endings to matches (the worst of all being the double count-out or double disqualification. Those must have been real downers).

Today, with PPV ruling the landscape, they book feuds over a series of matches, not just one "all or nothing" contest. When confronted with building storylines that encompass several matches to settle a feud, the occasional count-out is going to come into play, if for no other reason than to justify the next match in the series.

Obviously, we don't buy a PPV we know is going to end in a count-out, because we don't know what the ending will be, right? But that the match sometimes ends that way doesn't put a damper on it for me, not if it builds excitement for what's going to go down next month.

Hopefully, the last match in the feud....the one that settles matters.....will be a good old-fashioned pinfall or submission.

 

[rokuma]

I don't see the big deal. If done correctly, this can be effective. WCW used to use this strategy a lot and it helped further storylines. You rarely saw a WCW PPV main event end "clean." That being said, I do not think this is an effective method at major pay-per view main events. Using the WCW analogy, the Sting-Hogan match was widely criticized for the disastrous finish and it being "unclean." They should've had Sting defeat Hogan decisively and that be that. Could they have built the rematch at Superbrawl up anyways? Absolutely, but at Starrcade (the biggest WCW event) it should end decisively.

Same with the WWE. Wrestlemania should never end on a non-decision. It should be definitive. Save those endings for lesser PPVs, not the big ones.

 

[DirtyD79]

It's not so bad if it's a free TV show and it isn't overused but if it's a pay per view you expect a clean finish for your money. Pay per views are where story lines come to a head. Sure you hope your guy will win but at least the very least the finish is an actual finish and not some bullshit like a schmozz, DQ, or count out.

Even worse is when the results are nullified on free TV the next week. TNA went through this for a while where every pay per view ended in a dusty finish. On thursday night on free TV they would nullify the outcome and announce a tournament to end at the next pay per view only for the same thing again. This is why TNA can't sell pay per views. I know if I ordered a pay per view and the results were nullified the next day on free TV I'd feel like a chump.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

I remember back then in older PPV's if a face wins via count out or DQ the crowd would be cheering. Now a days fans would be pissed if PPV matches ended that way.

While I would like most PPV matches to have a definitive finish, I wouldn't mind seeing a few countouts in high profile matches. Especially if the heel gets counted out or face get screwed. Sometimes it works pretty well to generate heat or protect the two stars. The most recent one I can think of was Night of Champions when Batista was counted out against Edge. It protected Edge as a Heel Champion and made Batista look strong and could have set up an interesting story if not for Edge's injury.

I think in older PPV's Jesse Ventura would often say that if a Champion get's DQ'ed or Counted Out he/she keeps the title but does not get the winner's money. I think this made count outs or DQ's easier to accept back then. Question is would a similar rationale work today?

 

[Ellye]

At this point, I can only imagine people throwing their remotes at their TV screens if WM29 ends in a count-out lol

Well, there are many ways for a count-out to happen.

But if a countout happens at WM29, it means that probably either one of those happened:

- Either Cena or Rock were beaten so hard and definitely that they couldn't manage to get up in a count of ten. That's a conclusive ending to their match - even more conclusive than a pinfall. And I don't remember ever seeing this on a PPV main event on WWE. It is kinda of anti-climatic unless the match itself builds up really well, though, so it must have a perfect execution to work out alright.

- Either Cena or Rock decide to walk out on the match, which, given the circumstances, pretty much scream "heel turn". If Cena is the one to walk out, I guess it would indeed be a worthy ending for WM, everything considered.

So I believe that a countout finish at WM could actually be more eventful than a standard finish, depending on execution.

 

[HBsam31]

I remember in the old WCW days that Ric Flair would always retain his title by count out of time limit draw or something of the like. I never had a real problem with it as long as we knew we would get a rematch. The title is a bit misleading as by the time we knew there was a count out the money would be paid. Would I buy a ppv if I knew in advance it would end in a count out? Well I guess it depends on how good of a match I thought the two wrestlers would put on. It has been used a lot in the past to protect characters so I don't really think it would affect whether or not I would buy the ppv.