WWE Singles Matches: The Re-branding and the Re-re-branding

[Coco]

Let's not deny the facts, my friends. Standard singles matches don't mean a whole lot in the WWE. Whenever one takes place on a pay per view, you know there will normally be two or three gimmick matches further down the line which will be more important than the standard singles match. It would appear that the art of the standard singles match has been rendered obsolete. That said, I've thought of a four part plan to restore interest in standard matches using the WWE's current gimmick pay per view format.

Part 1: Eliminate Standard Matches​

In a blockbuster announcement meant to give the WWE Universe more thrills per minute, Vince McMahon will declare that standard matches have been replaced with ladder matches. In their absence, fans have the opprotunity to forget how misused standard matches have become over the years.

Part 2: Blowoff​

After a year or two with no standard matches, have a heated feud that has been through Last Man Standing, I Quit, Ironman, and Hell in a Cell matches come to an end in... A STANDARD ONE ON ONE MATCH! The buzz surrounding the final epic encounter between the two gladiators ought to be just enough to restore some lore to the match type. Ideally, at least one of the talents in this match will be such a newcomer that Cole will be able to say something awesome sounding about how this is ____________'s first standard singles match ever. That really adds an extra level of intrigue to all of this.

Part 3: One on One​

As standard singles matches blow off a couple more feuds in the coming years, a demand in the WWE Universe for more of these matches will grow. In order to satisfy this hunger, a special all standard match pay per view will take place a month after WrestleMania called WWE One on One.

Part 4: The Re-re-branding​

As standard matches grow more popular and people become bored with ladder matches, Vince McMahon reinstates standard one on one matches as the signature match of the WWE to give his public what they want.

So, a few questions for you:

1) Are standard one on one matches worth restoring prestige to?

2) Would you pay for a show such as WWE One on One?

3) Should anyone be branded as a "standard match specialist" during this re-branding?

4) Is the ladder match the correct choice?

Discuss.

 

[Ferbian]

Interesting thread Coco.

1) Are standard one on one matches worth restoring prestige to?

I wouldn't say there is any prestige to restore. Was there ever anything special about a singles match? Absolutely not. We get one every single show, and singles matches has always been around. So obviously there is nothing special in a singles match, never were and most likely never will.

So why try to restore what was never worth a damn? A singles match is always nice, but they hold no water to any other match type. That is, unless you throw two specific big talents together (Rock vs Austin for one). But that doesn't mean that their gimmick matches wouldn't have been even bigger.

2) Would you pay for a show such as WWE One on One?

I guess. I mean it all depends on the people thrown together for the matches. A show doesn't need to be all gimmick matches, or a mixture of it in order to create a great Pay Per View. The matches on the card is supposed to make the Pay Per View look good, and the performance of the wrestlers is supposed to live up to the hype. Doesn't matter if it's a singles or gimmick match.

3) Should anyone be branded as a "standard match specialist" during this re-branding?

No? There's nobody branded a Hell in a Cell specialist, a ladder match specialist (Okay that might be wrong, but you know what I mean) etc. They have experience in it, but they're never hyped as specialists of the match.

4) Is the ladder match the correct choice?

I doubt there's truly any right choice in this matter. All singles matches replaced by ladder matches would make for a very strange weekly programming if you ask me. But I guess that goes for more or less anything. If WWE was truly to make a re-branding they shouldn't stick to one type of match, but an array of different matches to keep the ladder match (in this example) from becoming less special.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

.

So, a few questions for you:

1) Are standard one on one matches worth restoring prestige to?

2) Would you pay for a show such as WWE One on One?

3) Should anyone be branded as a "standard match specialist" during this re-branding?

4) Is the ladder match the correct choice?

Discuss.

Tell you what this idea somehow screams "Indy fed" to me but I'll try to answer your questions.

1.Pretty sure standard matches have their own place in pro wrestling. That being to be the first match of a feud. There have been plenty of great One on One matches. Some examples which instantly come to my mind are Bret vs Owen at Wrestlemania 10 and Austin vs Bret at Survivor Series 1996. The reason why singles matches are not used as Feud Ending matches as you are saying is because the standard match has a few limitations. For a feud ending match people want to see how far wrestlers can go when they are not bounded by rules.

2. No I would not pay for such a PPV. Basically I've seen all the wrestlers already perform in more dangerous matches and do outrageous things to each other. So why would I care to see them in an environment which limits them?

3. How can someone be branded a specialist in a match that has already happened countless times in pro wrestling? You cannot delete history can you?

4. If you check out my previous answers you'll see that I am hardly in support of your idea. However if I am forced to suggest an idea for your match I'd say something along the lines of a 15 minute iron-man match. Basically not all talents currently employed in the WWE can wrestle in a ladder match. For example Big Show, Khali, Mark Henry and I would not like to degrade the value of the ladder match in that way

 

[silverwraith720]

I see exactly what you're going for here, and I like the way you presented it (though I don't think Ferbian really got the joke.)

I understand you're logic, but here's something else to think about. If wrestling was just that, wrestling, with no vignettes, promos, or back stage segments it would be much more like an actual sporting event. Not to say that this is bad, but it would get pretty boring and no one would really watch.

Let's compare SmackDown! to RAW. SD is clearly the wrestling show. There's a lot less crap going on and in a way, that makes it a superior show. RAW is entertainment show. Now, I'll admit, it's not always for the best. We can do away with with guest hosts, BS diva's "matches" (i.e., Diva's Pillow Fight invitational, Diva's Indian vs. Pilgrim Brawl, Diva's Bull Riding contest; how about we get a new Diva's gimmick match? We'll call it a Diva's one-on-one match), or Santino's dance off. I digress. The point is RAW leaves you with much more to talk about afterward.

Right now I'd say the ratio of talking to wrestling on SD is about 30/70, on RAW it's about 60/40. There is an ideal balance, I'd say around 35/65. And how you may ask do gimmick matches play in to this?

I absolutely agree with you that there should be more one-on-one matches. Or even call them standard matches, they don't have to be one-on-one, they could be tag matches. But that doesn't mean we should completely get rid of "gimmick matches" (it's come to the point where that's almost a dirty word.) I agree they should be lessened in number, but it's more about the placement of them within the card.

Also, if you look back at Attitude Era PPV's, there were very few non-gimmick matches. Take for example Wrestlemania X7. 11 matches, save for the one on Sunday Night Heat. There were 2, yes count them, 2 (that's T-W-O) standard one-on-matches if you don't count titles matches. 6 if you include title matches, but that's still about half the entire card made up of gimmicks.

 

[Iversen]

One of the main problems with this idea would be damage done to competitors. If you only use for example ladder matches theres constant pressure for bigger spots etc on a much more regular basis. Especially at places like Wrestlemania. If your doing ladder matches every week lets face it things like people jumping off ladders won't have the same thrill anymore. Your gonna have to beat that and where do you go to do that?

Standard matches don't need to be changed in my opinion really. Yea no one gets excited just because a match is a standard match but at the same time they produce a lot of great matches.

 

[Yomommma]

Boy, these nerds really don't get sarcasm....they are the reason we get all these crap gimmick matches. I'm gonna cry cuz I didn't see blood in the match.....wahhhhhh...I'm gonna cry cuz nobody dove off the cell.....wahhhh
I'm gonna go post my lame opinion on some nerdy soap opera-esque forum like some broad....

Whenever there is a good one on one match...let's say HHH vs Randy Orton at WM after their long feud...everyone jumps on here to wring out their tampons and bitch about how bad it was. Wrestling is a scripted sport...it shouldn't be ridiculously lame matches involving weapons and fire and barbed wire and a fucking back hoe to pour dirt on your opponent after you threw them in a fake grave......

if you want that crap, go watch one of the cheesy Scyfy channel movies.....then again.....

 

[Ultra Awesome]

Knowing you Coco, I'm 75% sure you made this thread with sarcasm and are just going to laugh at people who take you serious (We all know how much you hate the non-spam, dude). Though then again, knowing you, you probably ARE serious. Fuck man, stop having such a twisted personality!!!

Anyways, just for kicks, I'll be humoring you and discuss your hypothetical theory.

1) Are standard one on one matches worth restoring prestige to?

Yes, I feel they do need to have prestige returned to them. The simple reason is because after constantly having these standard single matches happen at places like PPV's, Live shows (etc), they have trully lost all prestiege they once had in them. It gets to the point to where people see a singles [standard] match on a PPV's main event, and all they really say is "meh." Of course, this varies on who's actually in the match. But in reality, no one seems to give a damn if a match is just a plain ol' standard match---yet people easily mark-out for it, if say the match was an "Ironman match" or an "I Quit" match.

2) Would you pay for a show such as WWE One on One?

All depends. Say your theory does happen and it really does work, then I am 90% positive I (along with many others) would love to see a PPV like that. After all, Single standar matches haven't been seen a very long time---making them look all special. On the other hand, if your theory does NOT work, and no one really cares about standard single matches, than I will [obviously] not be buying such a PPV.

3) Should anyone be branded as a "standard match specialist" during this re-branding?

Nah, I don't think so. Sure you have your ladder specialists (etc). But this a fucking singles match you are talking about. The plainest of the plain. Why would there be a specialist for it. But say I were to pick someone, I would pick Eddie Guerrero. Sure he's dead, but God-dammit---he's the best in the world! Fuck Chris Jericho.

4) Is the ladder match the correct choice?

Personally, I'd prefer a variety of gimmick matches---not just ladder matches. What if, instead of ladder matches, you'd have Iron-Man Matches, I Quit matches, Hardcore matches, Last man Standing matches, Tables matches (lol), etc. Now that would be fucking dope.

This was fun. You have to do more of these, dude.

 

[GameOver]

I prefer the standard one on one match, or an actual "Tag Team" match and they can have all the prestige if it is just that One on One or Two on Two. unfortunately how often does that happen?

90% of the time there is interference, a dodgy ending, a no contest a sudden change of the rules without telling anyone, That's what needs to stop, it's been since b4 the attitude era with only brief periods of clensing.

Gimmick matches need to be used for hot fueds and ending fueds or on PPV's
and the whole idea of themed PPV's is dumb.

OK in theory it's good but then you know 3-4weeks in advance what the matches are gonna be when they announce who is facing who for the 2 world titles +1 fued match and end up having 3 almost identical matches on the one card. BORING!!!!!!

Lastly if i was gonna chose gimmick favourites for me
Ladder Match, Iron Man and Elimination matches

 

[Coco]

One of the main problems with this idea would be damage done to competitors. If you only use for example ladder matches theres constant pressure for bigger spots etc on a much more regular basis. Especially at places like Wrestlemania. If your doing ladder matches every week lets face it things like people jumping off ladders won't have the same thrill anymore. Your gonna have to beat that and where do you go to do that?

I agree with that. Having said that, standard one on one matches also present their dangers in that you risk serious brain injury every time you take a standard back body drop. So if you're really concerned about the safety of the wrestlers while at the same time committed to this cause, I have an alternative suggestion: make the back body drop illegal and make every match a first blood match. Wrestlers risk less injury when blading than they do when taking a back body drop, so this makes the most sense in terms of worker safety while also working towards the goals stated in the original post.

Thanks for posting. You really did a lot to help my idea evolve.