# In your opinion, where are AEW going wrong?



## Boldgerg (Apr 2, 2017)

I loved AEW at first but I have to admit, my excitement is slowly fading. That's not to say I suddenly don't enjoy it at all or think it sucks, but there is a growing lack of consistency and areas that, for me, they are clearly failing in.

*- Under utilising/misusing the real talent:* Kenny Omega is a prime example of this. The man is arguably the best wrestler in the world, but has spent the last month floundering around doing nothing, and is still yet to cut a live promo. The guy should be being presented like a big deal and one of the main focal points of the show, but instead he's coming off like a run of the mill mid-carder.

MJF also needs to be on every show. Whether it's a match, a 1 minute, pre-recorded promo, or a longer, in-ring promo, GET HIM ON THE SHOW. He is potentially the best heel in the industry and will get people talking.

Hager? I mean what is the fucking point in this guy so far? He has been on the roster since the first night on TNT and he just adds nothing. Why they are taking so long to involve him more I have no idea but after a fairly hot debut I already could not give a shit about him after 12 weeks of watching him stand there in silence looking awkward and not having a single match.

*- Excessive tag matches:* Honestly, I can't be the only one sick of this? Give me some more fucking singles action!

- *Too much YouTube/social media reliance for advancing/explaining angles: *Cut one of the 400 tag matches a show and get this stuff on TV. Having something as big and as important for character and story line progression as Hangman quitting the Elite, for example, is ludicrous.

*- Women's division is a fucking mess:* I don't give a crap about women's wrestling, I'll be honest about that, but even I am bemused and irritated by what a complete and utter cluster fuck it is. Riho was a bizarre and laughable choice for the first ever champion, the woman doesn't speak a word of English and isn't able to cut promos, is 3 foot 4, and worst of all has barely been on the fucking show. Then you have the likes Emi Sakura with her horrendous look and gimmick taking up TV time on a regular basis. The booking is bizarre and it's just fucked.

- *JR is struggling... badly: *I still love JR, the man is one of the voices of my childhood, and at first I defended him, but his constant mistakes and brain farts are becoming irritating and distracting. It's a shame but I think it's time to hang it up. Schiavone, Excalibur and Golden Boy would be a better team, in my opinion.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

Meaningless tag matches,

Feuds that lead to no outcome,

Young Bucks for me. They are proper marks for themselves. Tired of it.

Lack of consistency and storyline continuity. Cody lost to Jericho cus of MJF and they sorta brushed it to the side initially.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Most of the talent they hire are goofs that don’t understand pro-wrestling or connect to pro-wrestling audiences. It’s vanity booking and it’s not a show for fans, but for them.

“Self-indulgent” is a phrase I’ve heard used. That’s pretty perfect. They do what they think is good, and because they are who they are, they think it’s inherently good and going to be received well because they’re goofs that have lived in a bubble forever and a day.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

"AEW is perfect, they aren't doing anything wrong. Go back to WWE, troll"

I imagine you are going to get a lot of posts that look like this.

I haven't figured out the point of singles wrestlers being in tag team matches, they don't get an opportunity at the tag team titles and their tag record doesn't help or hurt their single's ranking. Take Kris Statlander, she's 0-2 in tag matches, and 2-0 in single's matches and now she's the number 1 contender. It just seems like wrestling for wrestling's sake which seems like the central problem with AEW.

Somebody was watching WWE and said there's not enough wrestling so they made AEW be all wrestling, but when matches don't have a story, don't have a build, and don't affect title contention then it's like watching a house show-- it's a nice diversion but ultimately a waste of time. Nothing in AEW feels like it has any stakes unless it's directly related to Jericho, Cody or Moxley, everybody else is exhibition filler.


----------



## Gh0stFace (Oct 10, 2019)

At least they care more about the fans than Vince. RAW & Smackdown are truly Vince's show. Not the fans



Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> "AEW is perfect, they aren't doing anything wrong. Go back to WWE, troll"
> 
> I imagine you are going to get a lot of posts that look like this.
> 
> ...


LOL are you implying anything in RAW or Smackdown feels like there is stakes? AEW has done a good job of building up to Full Gear and making stakes matter; IDK what happened afterwards


----------



## RainmakerV2 (Nov 8, 2017)

Gh0stFace said:


> At least they care more about the fans than Vince. RAW & Smackdown are truly Vince's show. Not the fans



No they dont. They care about the fans who like their goofy shit and put them over on the internet. If they cared they would have actually signed a real roster.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

They're building towards the future without establishing a viable present. The best example of this is the women's division.

There are no stars in that division except Awesome Kong, and she came in late. There's literally no reason to care. The women's division needed a Mox too. 

There seems to be little strategy in their acquisitions for mid to low card talent. If I was AEW, I'd put as much money in limited contracts for established stars as possible and a minority of that into guys with potential. Then I would convert into long term contracts for the best fits.

Another problem I am willing to admit is that they are putting too much emphasis on certain body types. Namely, small, agile, spot monkey types You won't get mainstream heat like that. . 

Next, I'd get rid of JR. Love him, but on occasion he sounds as if he's burying the product on air. 

Lastly, I'd actually hire a booker, Plain and simple. Make it public too. There's no reason that Kenny Omega should be losing out of fear for looking like later day WCW.


----------



## USAUSA1 (Sep 17, 2006)

Vince Russo is right, they need a booker to focus on the storytelling.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

They want to please too many people.


----------



## TheGreatBanana (Jul 7, 2012)

Too many long matches that have no meaning. Too little promos. Putting all the stuff on YouTube, Twitter etc is not good at all. You should be using the main product to showcase character building, that’s what gets the people invested more. Not everyone is a AEW mark following social media. They got too many crappy gimmicks that look cheap. Stuff like Dark Order only works as vignettes but not in wrestling, it looks stupid and something most casual people would look down on. It doesn’t help that most of the entrance music doesn’t sound great either.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

Here we go again...


----------



## Taroostyles (Apr 1, 2007)

I'm gonna go with the 5 main things 


They dont have an overarching storyline. Inner Circle vs Elite hasn't been featured enough. The story should be IC vs Elite with Moxley as the renegade. 
Too many guys given credibility. Talents like Darby, Scorpio, and Jungle Boy are great but having Silver and Reynolds as part of your main event angle was a mistake. Its okay to have some guys who just jobbers. 
Womens division lacks focus and Brandi angle isnt helping. Look I get that she wants to make her mark but I don't need 2 Brandi segments every week. 
They aren't making the show must watch. They were at 1st but now it's been weeks since they gave us a good cliffhanger ending. They need to make this a focus, they are the underdog with a huge hill to climb. 
Production elements like sound and the commercial breaks. They are having important shit happen during the breaks and not even talking about it. Someone needs to format the show better. 
Look I can see everyone is panicking but these are all fixable problems and the show is still the best of the week for me. NXT has stepped its game up and now AEW has to counter on New Years, they need a grand slam show with big moments. Period.


----------



## Deathiscoming (Feb 1, 2019)

The Wood said:


> because they’re goofs that have lived in a bubble forever and a day.


Bubble reminded me of..._a lil bit of the bubblyyyy_


----------



## Oracle (Nov 9, 2011)

Hager you hit the nail on the head i mean hes been on the show since week one of TV and done absolutely nothing what was the point in signing him? you want a bodyguard cool then just hire some bodybuilder off the street. absolutely puzzling signing so far.

Riho look its fair to say they made the wrong choice making here the champ she hasnt been seen since full gear you cant have your womens champ not appear on the show for a month thats just bad booking and they would have known about her japan commitments aswell 100 percent needs to drop it on Jan 1st or that will be massive failure. why would anybody care about the women when the champ shows up when she feels like it. shes not Brock Lesnar ffs.

I thought not having a mid card title would work but it doesn't theres nothing for these guys to strive for guys like Jimmy Havoc, Kip Sabian just seem to be there doing not much of anything.

January is a pretty big month for AEW probably there biggest to date lets hope they can turn it around because if they dont WWE has the Rumble and road to Wrestlemania and it could be very bleak in terms of numbers.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Gh0stFace said:


> At least they care more about the fans than Vince. RAW & Smackdown are truly Vince's show. Not the fans


It feels like this has been a vanity project for Cody "look WWE I can be a main eventer!" he is quickly becoming Jeff Jarrett


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Gh0stFace said:


> At least they care more about the fans than Vince. RAW & Smackdown are truly Vince's show. Not the fans


No one is talking about WWE. Them doing something shitty doesn’t negate AEW doing something shitty.



RainmakerV2 said:


> No they dont. They care about the fans who like their goofy shit and put them over on the internet. If they cared they would have actually signed a real roster.


Oof. This one hits with the sting of truth. Very clear that they don’t have a clue how to appeal to larger audiences.




DOTL said:


> They're building towards the future without establishing a viable present. The best example of this is the women's division.
> 
> There are no stars in that division except Awesome Kong, and she came in late. There's literally no reason to care. The women's division needed a Mox too.
> 
> ...


JR only buries the product because the average viewer would be too. If you don’t want JR to bury shit, don’t put shit in front of him that he has to bury.

Every time you hear JR bury something, take a note. That means something that shouldn’t be on TV is on TV.

Ironically, letting Omega and The Bucks get anywhere near creative or talent relations or whatever has been quite similar to allowing Hulk Hogan creative control



Garty said:


> Here we go again...


If you don’t want to talk about the subject, get out of the thread.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

The Wood said:


> If you don’t want to talk about the subject, get out of the thread.


Wait a minute. Didn't you just say in another thread that you don't pay any attention to me?


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

One of the thing that i think they're going to have to do is only using the "big" names.

That means only using Jericho, Mox, Cody, PAC, Omega, Dustin, The Bucks, SCU, MJF, PnP, maybe Luchasaurus and that's all.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

USAUSA1 said:


> Vince Russo is right, they need a booker to focus on the storytelling.



Billy corgan and Dave Lagana are genius at this


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> JR only buries the product because the average viewer would be too. If you don’t want JR to bury shit, don’t put shit in front of him that he has to bury.
> 
> Every time you hear JR bury something, take a note. That means something that shouldn’t be on TV is on TV.
> 
> Ironically, letting Omega and The Bucks get anywhere near creative or talent relations or whatever has been quite similar to allowing Hulk Hogan creative control


If the premise of workng for a company is to ensure its success, why the heck would you bury it in front of everyone? JR's job isn't to get his opinion over, it's to sell what's on screen. Any concerns he has he can address behind the scenes. I say this as someone who agrees with him most of the time.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

Gh0stFace said:


> LOL are you implying anything in RAW or Smackdown feels like there is stakes? AEW has done a good job of building up to Full Gear and making stakes matter; IDK what happened afterwards


No, I'm not implying that. Most of the shit on Raw and SD is filler and gets skipped just like the filler on Dynamite. Where WWE has an advantage is that they have more titles so more of the roster actually has something to work toward, also I've been invested in WWE's wrestlers for years, I can watch a million pointless Sasha matches because I already have an attachment to her, I'm not attached to most of AEW's roster so I can't watch pointless matches with no stakes.


----------



## Soul Rex (Nov 26, 2017)

Technically their biggest problem is the talent, Jericho can't carry the promo side of this show all by himself.

Also, vanilla midgets, shit midcard.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

It needs a booker and not Tony Khan. He's a fan boy. Sure he can have final say as it is his (daddy's) money, but they totally shit on the idea of proper storytelling and that writing is a skill and art in and of itself. Wrestlers as the bookers might have been a romantic idea, but Dusty and the like were not booking for 2 hours of television a week with a roster of 80 wrestlers.

No booker in their right mind would have booked Kenny Omega like he has booked himself. No booker would have allowed Cody Rhodes to book himself out of ever getting a title shot. No booker would have put the titles on SCU when Bucks, Lucha Brothers were the two biggest tag names in the world. And then add in former LAX. Cody made a big show of booking him out of the title, but then books him to be centrally involved in half a dozen storylines at once. The never fight for a title was virtue signalling, while then booking himself into every storyline and giving himself an epic entrance for even regular television. 

They have to resurrect Kenny Omega and fast. He's their Ace. He and Mox are two of the best in the world. PAC is right up there as well. 

You can put those three up against the top three of any promotion around the world and not look out of place. 

Book them like it. 

Jericho, Cody, MJF, Allin, Hangman are all a tier below. Book them like it. Not a bad thing, they're still top card guys but protect the Aces. 

Also can the EVP's fire a friend? When something obviously isn't working can they tell them as much and release them? Some things will work, others will not. Tony is hanging with the boys like he's buddies with them - can he make that decision even? Who is going to be the hatchetman? When all we hear is Tony and the EVP's are calling all the shots it means they have to do it. Will Shahid Khan have to send somebody from outside in?

I think one of the issues with Silver and his partner getting that ridiculous storyline last night was wrestlers are booking friends, and friends won't book other friends to be jobbers. So every wrestler seems to have to be pushed. Brandon Cutler is going to be some big reveal that nobody will care about other than the Bucks and Cutler himself. No fan gives a shit about Michael Nakazawa and yet he's used in the plum position last night because of his personal friendship with Kenny. The whole roster is nepotism and and hiring friends - they even admitted as much in an early interview, one of the Bucks flatly said it was fun hiring all their friends. 

The original plan for the muscle role in the IC was Anthony Ogogo, the Brit Olympian boxer that was signed developmentally. Jericho wanted Hager. So you have a role written for a green as grass newb to stand outside, look tough and interfere on occasion while being stateside to train and given to a multi-time WWE world champion and current MMA fighter to then do the same. 

Cody said that fans only need to watch Dynamite for the full storyline picture, and any online stuff was just extra flavoring. Absolutely not the case. If you don't watch BTE you have no clue about Hangman's issues right now, don't care a lick about Brandon Cutler other than being some D&D Cosplay jobber and same for Nakazawa. I agree that cut 20 minute pointless tag match out each week and have some character building vignettes. Cody said there would be no invisible camera man shots - so have the wrestlers interviewed by CVV. I mean what is that guy doing - he still seems to be just hustling away at his youtube series. 

Jim Ross isn't happy. He's trucking along and will deny it but you can tell this isn't what he signed on for. He doesn't give enough of a shit to know the wrestlers or the movesets. But he knows if this doesn't work he either is finished and probably irrelevant or goes crawling back to Vince.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> If the premise of workng for a company is to ensure its success, why the heck would you bury it in front of everyone? JR's job isn't to get his opinion over, it's to sell what's on screen. Any concerns he has he can address behind the scenes. I say this as someone who agrees with him most of the time.


Commentators are a conduit between the audience and the show. They need to have credibility. I know WWE have completely stamped out this idea, but a good commentator knows that they need to be trusted and welcomed into people’s homes. If they’re going to sell something to you, then you need to like them.

JR understands that if he is going to convince you to “Bahgawd! You can’t afford to miss this! Jericho vs. Cody on PPV! $50 on B/R Live!” or whatever the fuck, he can’t also be lying to that audience throughout the show pretending that what Brandi is doing is interesting. Because people will go “the fuck is this?”. JR’s approach has always been to go “the fuck is this?” with the audience, so at least then there’s a chance of them saying “yeah! Right on, JR!” and sticking with it until something good is on.

This is a large part of why JR had heat with Vince Russo during the Attitude era—he would call out the bullshit as bullshit all the time.

It’s not about getting himself over. It’s about a presentation people can trust. Putting something over isn’t just about yelling “oh wow! This is awesome!” over and over again. That’s why Tony Shiavone was persona non grata in wrestling for almost twenty years. People didn’t trust him anymore once he tried to tell them WCW was good. It’s why indy announcers are the fucking worst.

Credibility is a word a lot of people switch off on, but it is the perfect word. Commentators need credibility. Wrestling needs credibility. You are trying to get people to use their credit cards.


----------



## DJ Punk (Sep 1, 2016)

They've got a lot of things going right and my excitement has yet to fade personally. But if I had to point out some negatives:

-The women's division

-Marko Stunt wrestling too long/getting too much offense

-The Butcher, Bunny, and Blade lackluster Debut and already losing their second match

-Too many lights go out moments (does everyone in AEW have the power of the Undertaker?)

-Ref mistakes (getting better though)

-Cutting to commercial at awkward times (also getting better)

-Too many cult-like factions at once (I don't mind too much, but it'll only hurt the current cult factions more than help)

-Telling stories off screen with BTE (the stories should be told through AEW and not expect everyone to watch BTE to know what's going on)

Other than those things, I'm digging it. Dark Order has potential even though it's comprised of no names and jobbers. I like the concept. Storylines are picking up and we don't need to see all the main event guys like Moxley, Cody, Omega, and MJF every week. It makes each episode feel more unique and fresh when they're not booked every week. AEW is doing fantastic. They keep me hooked every week and excited to see the next episode. Plus, 90% of their matches feel like they have purpose behind them and don't feel like a pointless filler bout.

EDIT: Geez, reading some of the posts in this thread is depressing. I don't fault any of you for being critical, but it seems like some of you are reaching way too deep and seeing problems that aren't even there. Yelling "Nepotism" when so far The Elite have not been booked dominant at all. A shame some of you can't relax and enjoy this awesome time in wrestling.


----------



## Alright_Mate (Jul 21, 2014)

Indy style garbage is the problem.

As I said on the ratings thread for eight weeks the product felt fresh, over the past four weeks they've slipped into what I feared may happen. PWG style wrestling that you see from many Indy promotions, nothing is making AEW stand out atm.

Jericho, Moxley, Cody and MJF have been great but who else do you have? Omega just looks like some normal midcard guy, Hangman Page and PAC the same. Tag Division has so much potential but somehow they've turned it boring. Women's division has been a mess from day one, Kris Statlander being the only positive.

The rest of the roster come and go, some impress Like Darby Allin but the majority aren't worth television time.

They fucked up from Week 9 by producing a boring first hour, Omega vs PAC saved that episode for me. Week 10 they bounced back a little but none of the Wrestling stood out. Last week the card was terrible but you had delusional AEW fanboys trying to defend it. While last night felt like a glorified indy show and they decided to end 2019 in diabolical fashion.

AEW went from feeling new and fresh to unoriginal and boring.


----------



## Stellar (May 30, 2016)

-The main issue that AEW has is not explaining things on Dynamite that have happened elsewhere. Whether it is something that happened on AEW Dark or Being The Elite or on Twitter or whatever. Just random people showing up on the show with little explanation. Some of whom have told their stories on Dark but if they appear on Dynamite hardly anything has been explained of them. QT Marshall for example. Anyone that only watches Dynamite was probably wondering "Who is this guy?" when he randomly became Codys tag team partner.

They need to clean that up. Do better at giving the fans a reason to care and get invested in these wrestlers. There is more to this than what they can do in the ring.

-I do feel that having Riho as the first AEW Womens Champ was a bad choice. She doesn't talk nor does she have anyone talk for her. She doesn't do much of anything outside of the ring. Kong is in her 40s and shes already done more outside of wrestling matches than Riho. Kong as the first Champ (with Brandi), even though shes past her prime in the ring, would have been a much better choice. Then Kong eventually puts over someone much younger to help establish more Women in the division.

I see some of the complaints about MJF not being used enough or whatever else. I'm sure there are reasons why some talent are being used less. Hager is still doing MMA, MJF I _think_ had some sort of minor injury at one point. With him I think less is more anyway. With a lot of these wrestlers less is more.


----------



## Jazminator (Jan 9, 2018)

I loved AEW from the start, and I'm still loving it. It's a growing company, and that means there will be growing pains every now and then. I love the wrestlers, including the likes of Orange Cassidy, Marko Stunt, etc.

What can I say? I guess I'm just easy to please.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Commentators are a conduit between the audience and the show. They need to have credibility. I know WWE have completely stamped out this idea, but a good commentator knows that they need to be trusted and welcomed into people’s homes. If they’re going to sell something to you, then you need to like them.
> 
> JR understands that if he is going to convince you to “Bahgawd! You can’t afford to miss this! Jericho vs. Cody on PPV! $50 on B/R Live!” or whatever the fuck, he can’t also be lying to that audience throughout the show pretending that what Brandi is doing is interesting. Because people will go “the fuck is this?”. JR’s approach has always been to go “the fuck is this?” with the audience, so at least then there’s a chance of them saying “yeah! Right on, JR!” and sticking with it until something good is on.
> 
> ...



Everything you said is completely made up.

1# JR's commenting to personal taste; not what draws.
2# Commentary has and always will be about selling the show. If not, then why stop at that? Why not have wrestlers end match after a bad spot and say, "Sorry folks. We suck tonight. Muchuck chuck.." That is what JR does ever time he draws attention to something he feels is personally distasteful in the show.

3# There's a little thing called professionalism, and it isn't just limited to respecting your coworkers, but it's always in having the common courtesy to sound like you're on their side, even when you have concerns. What the hell does Rhio's size got to do with anything? Why am I constantly hearing that she is small when I have friken eyes in my head? That's not building trust, that's just beating a dead government mule.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

DJ Punk said:


> EDIT: Geez, reading some of the posts in this thread is depressing. I don't fault any of you for being critical, but it seems like some of you are reaching way too deep and seeing problems that aren't even there. Yelling "Nepotism" when so far The Elite have not been booked dominant at all. A shame some of you can't relax and enjoy this awesome time in wrestling.


Brandon Cutler, QT Marshall, Nakazawa having on camera jobs and certain pushes - SCU having the titles, a whole host of others even having jobs solely because their friends of the elite. The EVP's are hiring their friends and pushing them on television. That is nepotism.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Brandon Cutler, QT Marshall, Nakazawa having on camera jobs and certain pushes - SCU having the titles, a whole host of others even having jobs solely because their friends of the elite. The *EVP's are hiring their friends and pushing them on television.* That is nepotism.


Maybe they are the only guys and girls who wanted to come.


----------



## Tilon (Jun 27, 2019)

Kenny's an idiot for giving up his time to focus on the women. Absolute idiocy. Not a single woman can do anything close to what he's capable of.

Cody-MJF was hot as Hell. So they immediately turn over to job Cody out for some other new guys? Idiotic. You run with heat!

Basically, it's about time they stopped trying to make new stars for a while. They needed to, it worked well, but now it's time to get some such good shit going.


----------



## Post-Modern Devil (Jan 26, 2010)

In general, they need to be way better about presenting their upper tier guys not named Moxley, Jericho, Cody, Bucks, or Darby and they need to be better about delivering on big TV matches booked between top 15 level guys in terms of both build up and execution:

-SCU v Lucha Bros for the tag titles ended way too anticlimactically, had no build up during the rest of Episode 5 despite main eventing, and didn't have _quite_ enough animosity involved given what Lucha Bros did to Daniels...

-...Speaking of which Daniels/Pentagon was cold as **** by the time they got around to it especially when you compare it to Bucks/Proud N' Powerful.

-For what should have been the frontrunner for #1 Dynamite match of the year, PAC v Omega had no build up beyond one quick pre-taped promo, wasn't given nearly enough time considering how great both are and had almost zero follow-up for three weeks.

-MJF vs Page was pretty mediocre for what was supposed to be a crowning moment for MJF.

-Jericho vs Sky which was otherwise built up very well and concluded with a good match didn't give Scorpio Sky any promo time during the rest of the show which Jericho even commented on.

-SCU vs Bucks _again_ had no build & _again_ couldn't let SCU have any promo time because we clearly needed to waste time on a pointless Kong Squash.

-They don't bother airing the promo about MJF admitting he hired the mysterious goons who attacked his arch nemesis which you'd think would be pretty fucking important.

-Pentagon randomly loses to Trent on fucking Dark following with Lucha Bros then losing to the Best Friends in a pointless feud that elevated nobody and I'm sure existed purely to knock Lucha Bros out of tag title contention and make room for Bucks/PnP.


All of that being said, as far as this week goes I think they were better about what I outlined this week than prior ones. Page/Omega vs Lucha Bros may have had no prior build but felt as epic as a major bout involving 4 of AEW top competitors should feel. Had a lot of time, action was great all the way through, & made me feel like it could have gone to 25 or maybe even 30 minutes without feeling like the finish was weak. They also nailed the build up and execution for Jericho/Jungle Boy flawlessly from beginning to end and I hope they learn to apply those lessons to bigger matchups. Show was great and delivered better than I expected, AEW lost simply due to NXT delivering bigger matches and no Moxley this week to boost the ratings.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

A trend in the ratings those past few weeks is that the quarter in which aew lose the most viewers is always the quarter with the most commercials.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

Not building around Omega to start. This guy was hottest act outside WWE since end of Monday night war, an actual difference maker and a person that WWE sought after for years and had plans to make a top guy immediately.

Building around Omega from the off kills two birds with one stone. It gives you a face of the company that they are currently massively lacking.

Pushing Jericho as your first champion reminds me of Angle pinning undefeated Joe in 2006.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

There are a heap of places they're going wrong. Starting from the top.

1. They do not have anyone with a valid track record in writing episodic wrestling television which means their shows are creatively stifled and are written by people who are learning on the job. The first thing I would've done after agreeing to a TV deal is sign a writing staff of 3-5 writers who have written for either WWE, WCW or TNA in the past with Cody, The Bucks and whoever else is writing now being able to sit in, learn how to do it and a few years down the track once the job is learned they could then write the shows. 

AEW right now is booked and written like fans book their TEW shows (Wrestling booking game for those unaware). They have a few vital angles to get to the big matches but are mainly focused on just having good matches. Some fans such as myself don't care how good a match is UNLESS it has reasoning behind it. Give me a compelling angle, something to make me message my friends or share on Facebook saying "Whoa check this shit out!" and actually make me pumped for the match and then I will be interested in the match.

2. Very few of their guys look like wrestlers. I just went through the AEW roster on their website and out of the thirty or so guys on there maybe 5-10 look like they do something athletic for a living. That's nothing against smaller guys but have maybe 10-15 smaller guys and 10-15 big guys. A nice even mix. I saw an AEW rumble a few weeks back and Billy Gunn popped up in it and he was without question the biggest guy in it despite being in his mid fifties.

Some of their wrestlers look like children or supermarket workers. Guys who look like supermarket workers are the likes of Chuck Taylor, Darby Allin, Joey Janela, Orange Cassidy, Peter Avalon, Private Party and a couple of others. The one that is particularly offensive is the wrestlers that look like young children ESPECIALLY Marko Stunt who should not be competing on small independent level companies let alone on national television. Anyone who happens to tune in during a Marko Stunt match will legitimately assume that a minor is wrestling due to how youthful he looks and his height. I don't care how many flip flops he does or how good of a match he has he is a horrible look and shouldn't be anywhere near this. Jungle Boy and Riho also look like children but Jungle has just gone to a time limit draw with Chris Jericho the 20+ year veteran and Riho holds championship gold. They don't know what they're doing.

3. Too niche. Ideally AEW would want someone like myself watching their programming. I am someone who doesn't watch WWE and I'm open to supporting another national company which I did for many years as a TNA fan from about 05 to 2014. I remember Dustin Rhodes, Jericho, JR, Schiavone and love all of those guys PLUS I'm in that 18-30 male demographic which they no doubt want.

As I said above I don't care about good matches I like entertaining programs, drama and a male soap opera. AEW offers the kind of wrestling I hate which is modern independent wrestling style "Haha aren't we silly?" type of wrestling. Not every match needs comedy in it as a matter of fact I'd cut comedy out of matches entirely and just stick to "funny" characters who are funny outside the ring but ass kickers inside it. I'm a big fan of the NWA and they are doing a comedy angle right now with Aron Stevens (FKA Damien Sandow) and a wrestler by the name of The Question Mark. Question Mark makes people laugh as does Stevens but inside the ring they just have wrestling matches without doing anything stupid or insulting to a wrestling match. Sandow still manages to be comedic with his outlandish claims, delusions of grandeur and his tactics (Such as hiding behind a Christmas tree) without being insulting.

4. The fans. Not all of them but I was watching Judgement Day 2000 last night and the crowd were so hot for everything and they simply cheered, booed, chanted insults at the wrestlers etc. The AEW fans seem to want to get themselves over in a way which is really grating and again it's just like most modern indies. I was at an indy show just last week where I saw the cringiest wrestling fan I've seen in a while decked out in a Jericho T-Shirt and an AEW Championship belt and he absolutely thought he was the coolest man there., talking loudly about how much WWE sucks, how WCW sucks, how AEW is the future and rah rah rah. I've been a wrestling fan for almost 20 years and it takes a lot for me to cringe but I was cringing at this dude.

Away from that experience and the live fans we have the internet fans. I only really visit this forum and social media but EVERYTHING (Including this thread) breaks into how much better AEW is than WWE (It's not), anyone who doesn't like AEW is a WWE fan boy (They're not), if someone criticises AEW the person is immediately wrong and hated on. If AEW loses the ratings the fans look for something positive such as demographics, if AEW lose that then they have another ready made excuse, they constantly praise anything that comes out of AEW and again it's cringe and most casual wrestling fans or even "smart marks" don't want to be associated with them. If WWE had someone like Jungle Boy work a time limit draw with the WWE Champion they would be shit on but when it happens in AEW it's fine and good. The fans are a massive turn off from AEW even if it is just a vocal minority.

5. The Bucks, Cody and Kenny are very overrated. That doesn't mean they're not good (Although admittedly I don't see the appeal of The Bucks or Kenny) but if you talk to some fans they will claim Kenny Omega is the greatest wrestler that has ever lived, The Bucks are the greatest of all time tag team and Cody is already more successful than his father. It doesn't help that they're booking the shows and therefore booking themselves strong either. If you don't like any of those four you're kind of out of luck because they will play a massive role in the shows whether it's deserved or not. This is why you want non wrestlers running your wrestling events instead of wrestlers.


----------



## Best Bout Machine (Jan 24, 2009)

The booking of the women's division is the most obvious one. Kenny has made so many mind-boggling decisions that it's hard to comprehend. First, he had that Riho trash beat Nyla Rose in the inaugural title match. That was totally believable. Next, in easily the worst decision he's made so far, he had her beat Britt Baker. I'm not sure what kind of drugs he's on, but I'm interested. It's only going to get worse from here. He'll have Riho retain on New Years Day vs Kris Statlander. That's another totally believable result. I'm sure she'll beat Awesome Kong at Revolution, too. Super Riho cannot be defeated. At least she lives in Japan and doesn't want to move to USA. That's a positive since it means we don't have to see her on TV too much. But when we do, it just makes you want to change the channel.

JR has been terrible and needs to go. That's for certain. I guess Goldenboy is busy with other endeavours, which is a shame. I believe Tazz is available. He would be a fantastic replacement. 

The tag team division has been great, but I'm not sure about SCU being the inaugural champions. I like them and everything, but the first team to win should have been Best Friends or TH2.

There's not really much to complain about with AEW. They make you excited to watch wrestling again. Something other companies have not been able to do for many years.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

IMO there's nothing wrong with the talent and nobody they could sign will make a difference. Once feuds with Moxley/Jericho, MJF/Cody, Omega/Pac or Page etc start building towards the ppv. We will see the ratings go up a lot.


So to me there's a simple fix to prevent these down slides again. You need actual feuds going on and build up that creates interest. Right now you got these random matches with one or two week build up. So it all feels like time waster and throw away tv until they get too the good stuff. 


Look at Jericho short feud with Scorpio Sky. People watched that and had no doubt that Sky would lose. Same goes with Jungle Boy. He went from not winning a match and now people are suppose to think he's gonna beat Jericho.

Same thing goes with Butcher and Blade with Cody. How about they attack Cody. Then you have Butcher and Blade beat some other teams for a few weeks and wreck havoc beating up Cody backstage etc. Then Cody turns to his brother and they set up big tag match on one big show.

Or look at Moxley he lists open challenge. Darby Allin answers the challenge. So how about make the match for January 1st show or Bash at the Beach. Have them build up Darby give him a few big wins. Let them cut promos on each other for 4 or 5 weeks. Then do the match at the big show. Rather then just one week big up makes the match up not matter.


Or have someone like Kip Sabian feud with Omega for 5 or 6 weeks. Then do the match and have Omega win the feud. Again like I said above have Jungle Boy and Jericho for a few weeks. Have Jungle Boy beat Guevara or something like that on the way.


Basically what I'm saying is have top guys actually feud with lesser known talent for 4 or 5 weeks. Then spread those match ups over two big Dynamites. When they aren't building towards the ppv. That's way better then Cody feuding with MJF. But distracted by Butcher/Blade and now Darby. 


Or teasing Jericho/Moxley with Jericho having random little 2 week feuds. Or even having Omega feuding with Pac. The Omega ignoring him for a few weeks to wrestle Kip Sabian on Dark then tag up with Page. By doing that is just tells the audience that what they are doing on these shows don't matter. It's just wasting time and people will skip it. Since it's not must see tv.


By having top guys feud with lesser guys you get them over more. But you also can create more entertaining tv that way. I know people would care more about Omega/ Sabian, Moxley/Allin, Jericho/Jungle Boy and Cody/Dustin vs Blade/Butcher matches. If they actually built them up the same way they would build up ppv feuds. Especially if they do their job creating interesting angles with these guys. 


Yes nobody gonna spend 50 dollars on a ppv to see Jericho/Jungle Boy or Omega/Sabian, Cody&Dustin vs Butcher/Blade. But if you have them feud and build up guys like Jungle Boy, Sabian and Butcher/Blade while they're feuding with the top guys. I think it will create in more interest when you do these match ups.


I'm just surprised they are doing this much random time waster stuff. They did good job building Fyter Fest and Fight for Fallen with lesser match ups. They need to pick a big Dynamite or two and treat it like Fyter Fest or Fight for the Fallen.


----------



## DJ Punk (Sep 1, 2016)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Brandon Cutler, QT Marshall, Nakazawa having on camera jobs and certain pushes - SCU having the titles, a whole host of others even having jobs solely because their friends of the elite. The EVP's are hiring their friends and pushing them on television. That is nepotism.


The first 3 you mentioned are not pushed in the slightest. And what's wrong with SCU having the tag titles? You're reaching.


----------



## JBLGOAT (Mar 24, 2014)

-They need to make sure to always have one conventionally attractive woman in women's matches.
-Matches should only be as long as they need to be to tell the story.
-They shouldn't have matches for no reason i.e. private party versus SCU. That match made no sense from a ranking or storyline perspective.
-They need to get wrestlers characters over in the ring. Take private party. They should be doing vodka shots. Maybe bring girls from the party that they went to.


----------



## ReekOfAwesomenesss (Apr 6, 2012)

Everything Cornette has said since week 1.


----------



## K4L318 (Nov 12, 2014)

AEW's problem right now is how they have managerial problems wit peeps who dont have the experience as producers.

I think they been trying to payoff their press conference from Jacksonville so much that it became a long term booking issue.

Everyone in that Jacksonville rally has been the focus and that aint enough.

Britt Baker was the first chick signed, they passed her off as this major signing when she closer to Leva Bates in the ring.
SCU, god bless them dudes, the only reason it worked was cuz Christopher Daniels got hurt, could you imagine had Daniels and Kaz been the first AEW tag champs wit all these better options?
Hangman Page was first dude introduced and he was talkin bout being their first champion and shit the bed at All Out. You made one of your main guys choke. The one before that who choked was Kenny Omega.
Chris Jericho their real first major star signed is champ but what is he really building? if ya champ cant build shit then its time to put him out of his own misery.
Look how big Cody VS Jericho felt. Now watch AEW last night and explain how is it this now?

Ya wasted money in Jimmy Havoc and Shawn Spears, somehow roped Tully Blanchard in it and made them feel unimportant.
Its almost like Cody and Brandi are booking the show, while the Bucks are booking the tag division and are afraid of putting their selves over, while Kenny is, yo Im sorry but I get a feeling like Cody's wife is interfering wit Kenny doing anything wit the womens division. Ya really think Kenny would choose Britt Baker to be #1 girl? And why would Kenny who goes out and gets new girls book them against Awesome Kong and Cody's wife? Ya cant tell me Kenny was ok wit dat.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Nowhere for me - its a good show 

its just wrestling ?‍♂


----------



## RainmakerV2 (Nov 8, 2017)

DJ Punk said:


> They've got a lot of things going right and my excitement has yet to fade personally. But if I had to point out some negatives:
> 
> -The women's division
> 
> ...



They've tricked you into thinking theres no nepotism because they haven't put belts on themselves. You need to look up the definition of nepotism. Giving guys like Michael Nakazawa and Brandon Cutler guaranteed contracts and TV time on a national TV wrestling program is the definition of nepotism dude. Open your eyes a little.


----------



## silvergold (Oct 3, 2019)

If AEW fails as a company I will quit watching wrestling. There is no need to go another 15 to 20 years watching the same boring crap that the WWE puts out.


----------



## IronMan8 (Dec 25, 2015)

AEW’s strengths:

1. *Non-verbal storytelling.* Attention to detail is excellent. They have recently increased their efforts on commentary to hint at the plethora of social media stories. However, there’s still an expectation for fans to do their homework before each episode, so I suspect the most clever things they’re doing is getting missed by most.

2. *JR is a blessing*. He’s constantly pointing out the flaws, which gives me hope the product will improve because it means they’re aware of everything that annoys me. Thus, I don’t feel like an outsider.


Weaknesses:

1. *No-sell psychology*.

Example: a Lucha Bro got kicked in the head twice in 10 seconds, receives a dragon neck suplex, then 1 second later he’s able to do a somersault and flying punch.

Example 2: Kenny kicks someone in the head and they both fall down, but the other guy gets up faster than Kenny - and kicks HIM in the head - and then 1 second later Kenny is running towards the ropes

2. *Ballet wrestling*

Example*:* a Lucha Bro got chopped hard, and responds with a cartwheel. A cartwheel!

Example 2: Fenix does a coup de grace, but before jumping, bounces on the top rope 3 times while spinning... for absolutely no reason but to pop the mark crowd.

3. Selling real-life athleticism for marks to admire

Example: Excalibur drools over someone’s balance, which is real-life admiration (he really does have amazing balance), whereas JR puts the focus on the fact he landed on his opponent’s spine, which is kayfabe admiration (it doesn’t really hurt his spine, but you’re supposed to buy that it does and react accordingly). Hardcore AEW fans admire real life stuff


----------



## DJ Punk (Sep 1, 2016)

RainmakerV2 said:


> They've tricked you into thinking theres no nepotism because they haven't put belts on themselves. You need to look up the definition of nepotism. Giving guys like Michael Nakazawa and Brandon Cutler guaranteed contracts and TV time on a national TV wrestling program is the definition of nepotism dude. Open your eyes a little.


Again, guys like Cutler and Nakazawa are not pushed. Plus, this example would work if ya know...

There were actual more talented people to sign to the roster at this point in time. But WWE has to keep their talent hostage with 5+ year contracts. This isn't as open of a market as you guys are painting it. Who is being held down and not given a fair opportunity like Cutler or Nakazawa? Whose spot are they even taking?


----------



## DJ Punk (Sep 1, 2016)

silvergold said:


> If AEW fails as a company I will quit watching wrestling. There is no need to go another 15 to 20 years watching the same boring crap that the WWE puts out.


This 100%. I was about to give up on wrestling entirely before AEW. I seriously don't understand how people can even enjoy the current day WWE product. But if they do? Fine on them, but I can't and don't enjoy it at all.

Either way, AEW pushes WWE to be better and try new interesting things (like adding NXT to Survivor Series). So AEW in the end benefits everyone. But if it fails, it only benefits Vince's wallet.


----------



## Zbagint (Jul 25, 2018)

Overall I think the wrestling is pretty fun. Most of it is fast-paced and makes it hard to look away. In this day in age with everyone having short attention spans, I'm glad they don't waste a ton of time on repetitive rest holds and "face gets headlocked for 10 minutes" stuff.

Where they're really falling short is character development. Part of me understands why we only have a few guys doing promos because a lot of the roster isn't very good at it but they could easily build that up through backstage stuff. The Dark Order format of promos should be done for a lot more people on the roster. It's even more problematic when you have so few recognizable names and are doing all of nothing to give anyone a reason to care. Everything just seems the same to me. Every feud is built with either a brawl or a run-in and so many characters seem exactly the same. The more I think about it, the more that Jungle Boy segment bothered me. I'm glad they built him up don't get me wrong, but he's called JUNGLE Boy. Have his training montage be him swing off tree branches and running through a forest. Instead they give him a generic weight-lifting montage that could have been for anyone I have no idea how they could have missed something so obvious.

One thing I will complain about on the wrestling side of things is SCU being champions. They're not terrible but I'm not even sure they're top 5 in the tag division in terms of crowd reaction. They could have easily made YB vs PnP a title feud because there was actually a bit of story there. The Lucha Bros, Private Party and Jungle Express are all really over as well while SCU gets a pretty lukewarm reaction. I know it was a bad crowd, but I still remember Daniels dressing up as Pentagon at that PPV and getting absolutely no reaction when he revealed himself. They cater to the crowd pretty well, but booking these guys as such a huge part of your show when people don't really seem to care about them is a mistake.

Some of the wrestlers could use some acting lessons. I point to the Dark Order stuff again because that was one of the few times they built up characters really well, but I look back to that scene at the hotel and just how poorly those jobbers acted out that segment. They sounded like they had never even been in a Youtube video much less on TV. I still love those types of segments, but I bet they would connect a lot more with the audience if the characters are more convincing.

This goes without saying, but like the characters, the stories also need to have some real motive behind them. The Lucha Bros and SCU basically had a title feud off of nothing. They just attacked them for no reason (to my knowledge) and never even tried to give an explanation.

Their presentation needs to stand out more from your standard wrestling company. One thing that probably doesn't help wrestling in this day and age is that it doesn't evolve. Sure, the wrestling is a bit different, but the presentation of wrestling has barely changed in decades. AEW doesn't do nearly enough to differentiate from the WWE format of wrestling. They have their rankings, but they are so arbitrary and I don't think the average person is going to follow them because they have no end game. TNA's heel/face ramps and 6 sided ring were great ways to set themselves apart from what we're used to seeing. I wouldn't mind a few original AEW gimmick matches, more documentary segments (with the characters being less bland), a unique title etc.

I see a lot of people say they need to cut match time to add more segments, I'd rather they cut in-ring promos. Some like MJF's explanation for turning on Cody are valid, but most of them do absolutely nothing for character development, are actually longer than matches, and strike me as a really dumbed down way of storytelling. Jericho's promos are a great example. His first promo was a 10+ minute promo for the sole purpose of announcing his stable name. They could've easily done that in a two-minute interaction with someone backstage and spent the rest of that time doing segments to build everyone else. Jericho's promo with his dad went 15+ minutes and was filled with annoying crowd pandering, low-tier humor and no character development until he beat up Justin Roberts at the end. There's no reason that needs to be 15 minutes. Those 2 minute Dark Order segments did far more for character development than the 15 minute of Jericho did. And I'm positive guys like Jericho and MJF would absolutely excel in those format of segments.

To me, wrestling needs to be fun. I think they do well with the wrestling itself being fast-paced and having some quirky moments, but I would tone down the overly serious video packages and give everyone a reason to standout, even if it is unrealistic or hokey.


----------



## Freelancer (Aug 24, 2010)

Off the top of my head, I have a few.

1. MJF is a freaking star and should be featured on every show, period. When I tune in, I want to see him. Dude's an excellent talker and should be used to promote the company.
2. Same with Moxley, people want to see him.
3. Omega is one of the best, if not the best wrestlers in the world. Why aren't they doing much with him.
4. A lot of the matches just seem thrown together with no real story of why they are taking place.
5. JR in my opinion is the best announcer ever, but he's way past his prime. He's constantly making mistakes and having to be corrected.
6. The Midcard isn't the greatest. I know this will take time though.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

I think some of those problems come from good intentions.

They want to please everybody on the roster because if they start only using 10-15 guys for every show then a lot of people are going to say that they're doing the same thing that WWE is doing.

I think they have to understand that they're going to have to make some people unhappy


----------



## RBrooks (Oct 18, 2013)

Dark Order should be at the top of the list as of now. Ending the year with that lamest beat-down, putting over the bunch of geeks nobody can take seriously, is a big mistake. They need to get rid of this stable ASAP, it's gonna drag ratings to hell.


----------



## roadkill_ (Jan 28, 2010)

Vanilla midgets will be the death of AEW.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

DJ Punk said:


> The first 3 you mentioned are not pushed in the slightest. And what's wrong with SCU having the tag titles? You're reaching.


They're on television - it's a push. Television time is valuable. Cutler was that big creeper with the purple trim and they're setting that up for the big reveal that will supposedly shock the audience as he's besties with The Young Bucks (and co produces BTE) - just wait for it. Nakazawa is getting a BTE push as well being tied to Omega and then used on television as a sympathetic figure for Omega to care about when you could kayfabe the same thing with a wrestler who deserves a push out of it. QT Marshall got huge rub from his match teaming with Cody - again use somebody there who has a future not your training partner back in Atlanta who co-owns a gym you work out at. 

SCU is bland as shit and killing the tag division - but Kazarian was nice to the Bucks one time when they had a WWE tryout so they're made men and push beyond their utility.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

You're all just a bunch of WWE fans. Just kidding, people noticed these cracks months ago and they haven't really improved since then. I hope they do because I want them to succeed and give me more entertainment. Just wishing I had some of you backing me up when I was saying the same stuff months ago.


----------



## roadkill_ (Jan 28, 2010)

They're contracted to TNT for three years. But that doesn't mean TNT has to keep them on Wednesday nights for the duration. There is always the dreaded graveyard shift.

Khan needs to get his shit together and stop pushing 88lb micro midgets and forcing The Young Sucks down our throats.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

roadkill_ said:


> They're contracted to TNT for three years. But that doesn't mean TNT has to keep them on Wednesday nights for the duration. There is always the dreaded graveyard shift.
> 
> Khan needs to get his shit together and stop pushing 88lb micro midgets and forcing The Young Sucks down our throats.


Well even with last night rating they are doing better than what TNT was doing before AEW.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

SCU might be the least over tag team in the entire division, and I’m not even kidding. They’re as bland as bland can be.


----------



## 304418 (Jul 2, 2014)

They’re not a sports based promotion and failing to give a sports based presentation!!! I was expecting a NJPW style company (sports based, variety of styles, layered storylines) with a little bit of NXT/UFC (via the Road to... interviews), and TV-14 just meant more mature storylines that didn't insult the audiences intelligence and blood due to greater creative freedom, among other things. That was the impression I got with the PPVs, and was expecting it to continue with tv. Instead what I’ve seen is:

- Hotshotting certain angles (MJF heel turn; Scorpio Sky challenging Jericho for the AEW title immediately instead of a build and a chase through a rise in the rankings; Butcher, Blade and Bunny vs Cody; Pentagon Jr vs Daniels, which should have been a main event for Dynamite).

- Not really building to significant shows until the last couple of weeks (PPV & tv specials like Bash at the Beach).

- Not airing Road to... interviews on Dynamite to help build stories and the roster.

- Removing the AEW logo from the ring canvas, which helped them to stand out, bring about the impression that they are in fact giving a sports-based presentation, inspires WCW nostalgia, and may have helped to prevent the idea floating around that they’re WWE-lite. Basically, image matters here.

- Promos that are left on social media (Darby Allin’s promo in the build to his match with Jericho, which builds his character to the audience; MJF, which explains a major plot point in the Cody-MJF feud) or on AEW Dark (PAC – which, in addition to building PAC up, would have shown to those that haven’t ever watched the PPVs that there is blood in the promotion and that it is actually is a grown up and mature product). Put this stuff on Dynamite so that the audience has a chance to connect and care about what going on! The way AEW approaches this is too insider-y.

- Some stars have too many layered storylines. For example, Cody has to face MJF and I presumed Wardlow; the Butcher, Blade and Bunny; is technically still involved in a blood feud with the Inner Circle; and now might get in feud with Dark Order? And yet, it doesn`t feel like it`s Cody vs the World, which would have been interesting since he’s not going for the AEW championship anymore; it feels more like they`re just giving Cody all the storylines. Meanwhile the women`s division barely have any storylines or development in general going on.

- Characters like Jungle Boy, Private Party, and the Librarians don’t have video packages that are shot with Lucha Underground style cinematography to hype them up and help give their characters depths. Unless your Moxley, Jericho, Cody, PAC, Omega, MJF, Brandi, Nyla or Statlander, there are issues with general character development overall, and emulating LU would help some members of the roster look more appealing or cooler to the viewing audience.

- Homogenous ring style among the men. Too much like PWG, when there should be a variety of in ring styles that embrace American storytelling, or Japanese style storytelling though King`s Road. Plus, wrestlers like Sonny Kiss, Nakazawa, the Librarians, and the Dark Order don’t really help with the idea that its sports based. Dark Order is only tolerated though because of Evil Uno’s size and the fact that Stu Grayson can work. The Librarians are tolerated because they’re meant to be jobbers for their respective divisions, although Brandon Cutler and Dani Jordyn can also fit into the jobber role. Orange Cassidy and Marko Stunt should technically be also on this list, but since modern day wrestling incorporates comedy, it’s not like Cassidy and Stunt don’t fit in, so I leave them alone.

Basically, AEW is trying way too hard to be new school, and don’t seem to realize that the reason NJPW and NXT have the appeal that they have is that they’re old school; they just found a way to adapt old school to the modern era. And when AEW said they were going to be sports based, it was thought they would be continuing this approach. Instead, at times it feels like Impact Wrestling with a new coat of paint, much better management, a much better tv deal, and PWG wrestlers. And although all fans have their preferences, it`s not what I personally wanted from AEW. So I have moved on rather quickly, which is surprising for me, since it took years for me to move on from TNA. AEW happened in weeks since Dynamite’s debut, even though this promotion has gotten so many things right and deserves the praise it has been getting.


----------



## Papadoc81 (Jun 3, 2015)

It’s quite surprising to me how much time and effort AEW is spending on the Dark Order. It is extremely rare to hear or see anyone say anything positively about it. Not that people are negative. Just that it’s nothing really gaining all that much interest. In that way it reminds me of TNA’s aces & eights.


----------



## ClintDagger (Feb 1, 2015)

RainmakerV2 said:


> No they dont. They care about the fans who like their goofy shit and put them over on the internet. If they cared they would have actually signed a real roster.


The Elite are doing exactly what Vince does, booking what they like and what they want to see versus what the broader fanbase likes and what can make money. It’s hard to believe they fell into that trap so quickly but here we are.


----------



## Freelancer (Aug 24, 2010)

If they want to push The Dark Order, they need to make them this super evil cult that does stuff that actually shocks people and makes them want to see what's next. The lame beat down this week wasn't that, not even close.


----------



## LongPig666 (Mar 27, 2019)

They are not doing anything wrong. 

They are exceeding both their own and TNT's expectations regarding ratings, specifically in key demographics, they are getting good attendances, have a great social media presence, are in-line with their original business plan and have received very positive reviews globally. All this and they have only put out 12 shows.

The op and other posters here are simply being unreasonable, impatient, uneducated or are judging a new mainstream wrestling show based on their outdated and irrelevant OPINIONS from the 90's.


----------



## Geeee (Aug 9, 2010)

-MJF, Mox, Cody, Jericho, Omega should be on every show
-you should be able to fully understand the show by only watching Dynamite/PPVs
-since they are going for a less scripted environment, sometimes they swing and miss on segments
-some production elements show inexperience but they are getting better


----------



## Jedah (Jul 16, 2017)

1. Way too many random tag team matches. We shit on WWE for this all the time. AEW is doing it too.

2. Almost all of the matches are at least 5 minutes TOO LONG. Not every match needs to be a 20 minute masterpiece. One of the best examples was from a week or two ago. Did Nick Jackson vs. Fenix or Trent vs. PAC have to be as long as they were so that the MJF vignette couldn't get on the show?

*3. Related to the above, they have to understand that just having good matches is not enough.*

4. There's too much of a gap between PPVs. This leaves the shows directionless in the first month or so between them. A three month gap is just too long for a 2 hour weekly show. Bump the PPV schedule up from 4 to 6. 2 months leaves enough breathing room to build good stories but also leaves less room for randomness. If they're concerned about pricing, that's STUPID. If people will pay for 4, they'll pay for 6. Those 2 extra PPVs would make all the difference between being focused and filling the show up with randomness.

5. Get a secondary title. Too many people feel like they have nothing to do. Omega is a great case in point right now. I think he's going to become more prominent again when Mox takes the title, but all that buzz he had at the start of the year has quietly died. Maybe that isn't his fault, because Mox had to win at Full Gear, but you get the idea.

6. Not knowing who to feature. It feels like they're trying to get everyone over too quickly. Noble impulse, but it all feels random if it's done in too short of a time. The bulk of the shows should focus on Jericho, Mox, Cody, MJF, PAC, and Omega. With the women's segments, most of the focus should go to Statlander, Shida, and Riho (when available). Stop putting Britt Baker on my TV every week in overlong matches. Stop putting Sakura on my TV in overlong matches at least until she changes her awful gimmick. Maybe it's fine in Japan, but it's not getting over with American audiences.

Those are the structural things. If they can fix those they should be OK. Booking has some issues too but people will go at length about those.


----------



## Tilon (Jun 27, 2019)

LongPig666 said:


> They are not doing anything wrong.


Dude, I'm the biggest AEW superfan, and even I think this statement is ludicrous. Kenny giving up his time so shitters like Nyla and Baker get more screen time? Objectively stupid.

Pushing a dentist shitter wrestler that has no interest in working more than once a week so she's never getting better? Stupid.

Having MJF turn on Cody, then doing absolutely nothing with it in favor of having literally whos show up and beat him up for no discernable reason, then only tell fans MJF paid for them on social media? Stupid. And I love the Butcher's look. But stupid booking.

And now for some reason Cody and Darby are going at it again instead of what everyone wants to see, Cody and MJF. Yeah, don't have the match yet, but we want HEAT.

If you don't give these guys hell for what they're fucking up, then you're making a mistake. We have to let them know.


----------



## Shaun_27 (Apr 12, 2011)

To put it as succinctly as possible, they are creating a niche show for a subsection of the hardcore fans and getting that kind of ratings. They are writing a show they want to see, and not what the audience wants to see.

There are lots of points that people have already put more articulately than me, but I just want to underline two;

1) Complete lack/misuse of star power. Cody, Jericho, Omega and Moxley are the 4 guys to build the company around. Everybody else should be secondary, Hangman and MJF will come in time. The treatment of Omega is baffling and why is Cody never going to compete for the world title? You don't have to blow your beans this early and have them winning championships, but Kenny and Cody should be winning week in week out. Have them beat secondary guys Hangman and Pac on PPV.

2) Lack of identity. Open question - what is AEW? Who is their audience? I was quietly concerned with Tony Khan's and the CEO's answers in the interviews before the show launched and nothing I have seen has proved me wrong. They just kept saying "an alternative" - I am still not sure what they mean. Throwing around buzzwords and phrases like "alternative", "sports like product" and "wins and losses matter" don't fly anymore, yes the product is in it's infancy but after 12 weeks I'd hope to have at least a better of idea of what AEW's identity is.


----------



## Marbar (Dec 20, 2019)

Start optimizing usage of your starpower and focus on making them face of your company. I realize AEW needs to build new stars but Kenny Omega needs to step up his game and wrestle.


----------



## Whoanma (Apr 5, 2016)

Geeee said:


> *-you should be able to fully understand the show by only watching Dynamite/PPVs*


----------



## AEWMoxley (May 26, 2019)

The roster outside of Moxley, Jericho, and MJF just flat out sucks and will never appeal to a larger audience. I understand that some here drool over the in ring skills of some of these other guys, but that shit doesn't appeal to casual fans, nor does it appeal to every hardcore fan, either.

The other problem is that they aren't using their stars enough, and instead focus their time trying to build guys who will never get over with the viewing audience. They've also wasted a lot of time with garbage storylines like the Dark Order angle that literally nobody cares about.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DJ Punk said:


> Again, guys like Cutler and Nakazawa are not pushed. Plus, this example would work if ya know...
> 
> There were actual more talented people to sign to the roster at this point in time. But WWE has to keep their talent hostage with 5+ year contracts. This isn't as open of a market as you guys are painting it. Who is being held down and not given a fair opportunity like Cutler or Nakazawa? Whose spot are they even taking?


Nepotism isn't just regulated to massive pushes or positions of power. Nepotism is about getting any type of job or promotion solely off your personal relationship with someone. Nepotism isn't inherently negative, though people tend to treat it as such. Honestly though that's just how life works. If someone has the means to help out family and friends they tend to do it. But stuff like The Elite hiring their friends because they can is textbook nepotism.


----------



## DJ Punk (Sep 1, 2016)

RapShepard said:


> Nepotism isn't just regulated to massive pushes or positions of power. Nepotism is about getting any type of job or promotion solely off your personal relationship with someone. Nepotism isn't inherently negative, though people tend to treat it as such. Honestly though that's just how life works. If someone has the means to help out family and friends they tend to do it. But stuff like The Elite hiring their friends because they can is textbook nepotism.


Fair enough. I've related it as a bad term because so many have labeled it as such. But like you said, it's not necessarily a bad thing. And in the case of AEW, I don't believe it is (currently anyway).


----------



## Iron Punk (Oct 24, 2013)

Fat Jericho - to have an out of shape wrestler be their AEW Champion. He’s better off just cutting promos at this point, because his ring work isn’t even that good anymore.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DJ Punk said:


> Fair enough. I've related it as a bad term because so many have labeled it as such. But like you said, it's not necessarily a bad thing. And in the case of AEW, I don't believe it is (currently anyway).


Yeah it's because folk rarely talk about the good cases lol. People don't really talk about how the boss hired their relative and it was a great hired that improved business lol.


----------



## Geeee (Aug 9, 2010)

I actually think Nakazawa has been used very effectively. He's kind of like Kenny's Lois Lane. He's Kenny's best friend but he can't stand up for himself against anyone on the roster, so he becomes a vulnerability for Kenny. I especially enjoyed the Moxley/Nakazawa segment


----------



## ClintDagger (Feb 1, 2015)

RainmakerV2 said:


> They've tricked you into thinking theres no nepotism because they haven't put belts on themselves. You need to look up the definition of nepotism. Giving guys like Michael Nakazawa and Brandon Cutler guaranteed contracts and TV time on a national TV wrestling program is the definition of nepotism dude. Open your eyes a little.


Just about everything that is going wrong is due to either nepotism or vanity projects. The women’s division, Brandy, SCU are just the biggest examples. At the beginning Dynamite was 95% good stuff and 5% kinks needing to be worked out. Unfortunately that 95% good stuff has slowly been sliding down to where it’s almost 50/50. Even Meltzer said the last episode is the type of show that kills a company.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1208058219974803465
*Women's Division is weak, too many comedy gimmicks, nameless jobbers beating top guys, and no must see feuds.*


----------



## Jedah (Jul 16, 2017)

The gap between the pre and post Full Gear Dynamites has truly been staggering.

Hopefully things will pick up now that Revolution was announced, but it's still two months away. The Moxley vs. Jericho feud should start an overall upswing in quality.


----------



## ClintDagger (Feb 1, 2015)

DJ Punk said:


> Fair enough. I've related it as a bad term because so many have labeled it as such. But like you said, it's not necessarily a bad thing. And in the case of AEW, I don't believe it is (currently anyway).


Of course nepotism is always bad. It implies favoritism based on relation. If you hire the most qualified person and they happen to be a relative that’s not showing favoritism.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1208058219974803465
> *Women's Division is weak, too many comedy gimmicks, nameless jobbers beating top guys, and no must see feuds.*


I wonder if it's not a wrestler in that spot. They needed so many Creepers I wonder if they just grabbed office folks and the like from around back stage and put them under a mask for pile on spots and this poor sucker got Dustin in a mount. Also could that be a woman?


----------



## Whoanma (Apr 5, 2016)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1208058219974803465
> *Women's Division is weak, too many comedy gimmicks, nameless jobbers beating top guys, and no must see feuds.*


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

ClintDagger said:


> The Elite are doing exactly what Vince does, booking what they like and what they want to see versus what the broader fanbase likes and what can make money. It’s hard to believe they fell into that trap so quickly but here we are.


I agree. Good thing they have better taste than Vince. Doesn't make it a good thing though. I'm not surprised they fell into it. The issue with Vince isn't that he books what he likes. The issue with Vince is that he never grew out of it for the sake of business. I believe that the Elite will learn their lesson by this time next year.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life (Jul 31, 2013)

They started the show stating Dynamite would have a "real sports feel" and wins / losses matter. People expected NJPW mixed with NXT.
Now its peak TNA levels bad with jobbers/comedy acts all over. Sadly they just dont have the talent and Tony let every indy dork walk in with their bingo hall acts.


----------



## The XL 2 (Sep 13, 2016)

They have a horrendus roster outside of 5 or 6 guys. They could bring in 1997 Vince McMahon, Jim Cornette, Bruce Prichard, Vince Russo and Pat Patterson and those guys wouldn't be able to do anything with these guys. There are literally untrained random people in all walks of life that could be hired, put on TV, and have a better shot to get over with a national audience than these goofs because maybe they have an element that would connect with people, be it a good look, a physical presence, charisma, etc. Most of these guys in AEW are uncharismatic, unimposing goofs who look like marks who had a few months of training on a trampoline.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

Maybe they need to stop selling out shows. They wasted almost an hour selling out Revolution — this company really is circling the drain.


----------



## MetalKiwi (Sep 2, 2013)

Not sure if it's already been said, but the point system needs to go. They should start off 2020 without it.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

MetalKiwi said:


> Not sure if it's already been said, but the point system needs to go. They should start off 2020 without it.


What point system? You mean wins and losses? Exactly how is that hurting anything?


----------



## MetalKiwi (Sep 2, 2013)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> What point system? You mean wins and losses? Exactly how is that hurting anything?


It just reminds me of something TNA would do. Maybe the people at home don't follow it closely and it starts to get confusing?

Also Kenny and Pentagon jobbing isn't good. Is that just to distribute the wins/losses around?


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

They need an other single title.

It's easier to create storylines when it's for a belt.


----------



## CMPunkRock316 (Jan 17, 2016)

1) I would elevate the rest of the Inner Circle. PNP is awesome and I think they should have won the tag titles. Have Hager accompany Sammy G and help him win matches.

2) Get a TV Title. Great spot for Darby, Janella, Spears, MJF, Hangman and others to have something to occupy themselves with. Hell throw in at some point whoever is the champion they get a shot at the World Champion.

3) Put Pentagon/Fenix in the Main Event picture from time to time. They could do some great stuff with Mox, Jericho, Omega, Cody and PAC.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

The XL 2 said:


> They have a horrendus roster outside of 5 or 6 guys. They could bring in 1997 Vince McMahon, Jim Cornette, Bruce Prichard, Vince Russo and Pat Patterson and those guys wouldn't be able to do anything with these guys. There are literally untrained random people in all walks of life that could be hired, put on TV, and have a better shot to get over with a national audience than these goofs because maybe they have an element that would connect with people, be it a good look, a physical presence, charisma, etc. Most of these guys in AEW are uncharismatic, unimposing goofs who look like marks who had a few months of training on a trampoline.


Using NXT as an example... who were any of these men/women before being signed to WWE/NXT?

Street Profits, Pete Dunne, Tyler Bate, Bianca Bel-air, Tynara Conti, Enzo & Big Cass, Bayley, Alexa Bliss, Carmella, TM61, Velveteen Dream, Rusev, Tyler Breeze, Mandy Rose, The Forgotten Sons, Killian Dane, along with many others. Sure, you can argue that some of them were known outside of wrestling, even the ones that do have an indie background, but what you can't say, is that everyone I've mentioned was immediately a star and were the best wrestler you've ever seen.

Same logic and "rules" apply to what AEW are doing currently.


----------



## elidrakefan76 (Jul 23, 2018)

Showcasing too much talent with generic looks that look like they belong on the indies and not on national television. Marko Stunt, Private Party, Joey Janela, Darby Allin, Jungle Boy, Butcher and the Blade, Dark Order and most of their women's division all come to mind. Having a good and unique look is a big part of getting over with fans/making people want to tune in in addition to being good in the ring. AEW needs to sign more guys who look like stars.


----------



## elidrakefan76 (Jul 23, 2018)

Garty said:


> Using NXT as an example... who were any of these men/women before being signed to WWE/NXT?
> 
> Street Profits, Pete Dunne, Tyler Bate, Bianca Bel-air, Tynara Conti, Enzo & Big Cass, Bayley, Alexa Bliss, Carmella, TM61, Velveteen Dream, Rusev, Tyler Breeze, Mandy Rose, The Forgotten Sons, Killian Dane, along with many others. Sure, you can argue that some of them were known outside of wrestling, even the ones that do have an indie background, but what you can't say, is that everyone I've mentioned was immediately a star and were the best wrestler you've ever seen.
> 
> Same logic and "rules" apply to what AEW are doing currently.


I get your point but the difference between the NXT wrestlers that you mentioned and the indy wrestlers that AEW are signing is that many of the NXT names at least looked like and carried themselves like they should be on a national stage before signing with the WWE. Guys like Marko Stunt, Joey Janela and Sonny Kiss have no business being on tv and they just make AEW look bad.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

Cruiserweight wrestling has never drawn well. 

Watching the Lucha Bros/Page and Omega match now. Its not even wrestling. It doesnt look like a fight. It looks phony. They literally dont sell anything. Sorry, trash. 

I get people like that, its not my thing. Bored to death for half hour.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

Rozzop said:


> Cruiserweight wrestling has never drawn well.
> 
> Watching the Lucha Bros/Page and Omega match now. Its not even wrestling. It doesnt look like a fight. It looks phony. They literally dont sell anything. Sorry, trash.
> 
> I get people like that, its not my thing. Bored to death for half hour.


The only sell was Omega for the finish when Page wiped him out. So he and the others can withstand 20 minutes of carnage and get straight back up but when its time for the finish he is out like a light. Hillarious. 

Its very indie, but if you like that sort of thing fair enough but I cant watch a 20 minute match where every piece of offence causes no damage. Whats the point.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

DJ Punk said:


> Again, guys like Cutler and Nakazawa are not pushed. Plus, this example would work if ya know...
> 
> There were actual more talented people to sign to the roster at this point in time. But WWE has to keep their talent hostage with 5+ year contracts. This isn't as open of a market as you guys are painting it. Who is being held down and not given a fair opportunity like Cutler or Nakazawa? Whose spot are they even taking?


I can think of several people who should've been recruited to AEW that would fit in really well on national television that missed out. Nakazawa and Cutler aren't really taking their places but other talent that are undeserving certainly are.

Here's some off the top of my head:

- Austin Aries (Not sure if he has heat with anyone in AEW but him being an angry grizzled veteran and taking it out on the young guys would be some fun midcard work for him. Aries obviously is a great worker as we all know but can also cut promos and looks like he could whoop someone. AEW desperately needs veterans also.)

- Brian Cage (A big guy who can work the style that the AEW fans like. Don't really follow him in Impact but the little I've seen he seems to be doing well for himself and he'd immediately stand out on AEW TV)

- Eli Drake (A total package and no idea how he isn't signed anywhere but the NWA. Has great charisma, a good look and doesn't look as old as he actually is)

- Nick Aldis (Good look, good size, good worker and can cut a promo. Pretty much an overall package and definitely would've come along ESPECIALLY if they let him run around with the NWA World Heavyweight Title and fulfil NWA dates)

- Rob Van Dam (I know the AEW loyalists would turn their nose up at him but if you watch the man over in Impact he is without question one of their best heel wrestlers. He can still do his trademark moves and work a good match PLUS he is known to wrestling fans throughout the world and loved. He has more followers than Cody and Omega and would be a fine addition to the midcard with occasional main events)

- Ryback (Not sure how he's going injury wise but at 6'3 and close to 300 pounds he would be a massive breath of fresh air on a roster that is mainly junior heavyweights. Pair him with a charismatic manager and have him tear through the roster. Programs with Moxley, Cody and maybe even Jericho would not be bad for Ryback)

- Sami Callihan (Not hugely into the guy but as a fun midcard act he could work in AEW. He looks like a wrestler and can work the AEW style which is what they want. He does a good promo and looks intimidating also. Gets him away from having 50/50 brawls with Tessa Blanchard on Impact)

Immediately with just those 7 signings you have a good mix of star power and veterans that can get the wheels in motion. How aren't any of those guys signed in AEW but the likes of Jungle Boy, Stunt, Riho, Chuck Taylor, Private Party etc are? Ridiculous. Don't even get me started on the women.

MJF (Who is definitely a huge talent) beating Rob Van Dam on PPV means a lot more than him beating almost anyone else on the AEW roster.

---

In terms of spots for lower end cheap talent I'd say Cutler and Nakazawa are taking spots away from guys that could be potential future stars or even just more deserving enhancement talent. Caleb Konley has been doing work with the NWA as enhancement talent and he also looks like a wrestler and has some good solid experience behind him. Why not him? Why not ex WWE enhancement talent that knows how to work and aren't all about trying to get themselves over with silly stuff?


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

A lot of those guys were not available or injured.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> Maybe they need to stop selling out shows. They wasted almost an hour selling out Revolution — this company really is circling the drain.


*They're already on it:

 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1205275739374800896*


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

Why do you show a week old tweet ?


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

@Reggie Dunlop 
@Garty 
@LongPig666 

Do you guys work for AEW? Are you related to the Khans or members of the Elite? You guys go harder for AEW than normal fans, there isn't 1 single thing you would change about the product? You like every member of the roster, you think everybody's booking is perfect including Omega's? You wouldn't change anybody's theme song, or add a midcard title? The show is literally perfect in every conceivable way? 

A critique is not automatically hating, wanting to change a few things doesn't mean you want AEW to become WWE.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Whoanma said:


>


That Job Squad, I mean Dark Order member makes Shane McMahon look like Shawn Michaels, and Shane McMahon shouldn't be anywhere near a wrestling match by the way.
Do they actually have wrestlers under the masks or just get guys that are bored in catering that put the ring together?


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Jedah said:


> The gap between the pre and post Full Gear Dynamites has truly been staggering.
> 
> Hopefully things will pick up now that Revolution was announced, but it's still two months away. The Moxley vs. Jericho feud should start an overall upswing in quality.


The main issue they are going to have is we saw Jercho/Moxley years ago in WWE, so it doesn't feel like a big deal, just 2 ex-WWE guys that wouldn't win the title again there going to a smaller company like mid-carders did with TNA, I wish AEW had stuck with the idea of Adam Page winning the title.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

reyfan said:


> The main issue they are going to have is we saw Jercho/Moxley years ago in WWE, so it doesn't feel like a big deal, just 2 ex-WWE guys that wouldn't win the title again there going to a smaller company like mid-carders did with TNA, I wish AEW had stuck with the idea of Adam Page winning the title.


Jericho being the first champ was the best thing AEW could have done.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

rbl85 said:


> Jericho being the first champ was the best thing AEW could have done.


I personally think it's more engaging having a champion that appears to be out of his element winning over established heels, having "up and comers" losing to Dad bod Jericho adds no credibility to anyone, plus doesn't help feuds last 1 PPV then every one loses their memories and starts fighting someone else.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> @Reggie Dunlop
> @Garty
> @LongPig666
> 
> ...


Don’t fucking pull me into this shit. I have no idea what needs to change, wrestling promotion is a little outside my wheelhouse. I just watch the shit and know what I do and don’t like. And I’m sitting here laughing my ass off at all you armchair promoters, tv producers and industry experts who think you have all the answers, when none of you know a goddamn thing more about it than I do beyond thinking what YOU want to see on a wrestling show is what everybody else wants to see.

Like I said before, I don’t give a fuck if AEW goes out of business tomorrow. I’ve lived without watching wrestling for years, I’m pretty sure I’d survive a few more without it. I enjoyed their early shows a lot, haven’t enjoyed the later ones as much. But, y’all need to read a few more of my more recent posts if you really think I’m going hard for AEW — there’s plenty I don’t like and I haven’t exactly been quiet about it. And I’m pretty sure I’d enjoy it a hell of a lot less if they ever picked up some of the utterly lame-ass ideas being thrown around here by you geniuses.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *They're already on it:
> 
> https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1205275739374800896*


They just sold out the Revolution ppv in less than an hour. Try to keep up here.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> Everything you said is completely made up.
> 
> 1# JR's commenting to personal taste; not what draws.
> 2# Commentary has and always will be about selling the show. If not, then why stop at that? Why not have wrestlers end match after a bad spot and say, "Sorry folks. We suck tonight. Muchuck chuck.." That is what JR does ever time he draws attention to something he feels is personally distasteful in the show.
> ...


1. JR’s “personal taste” is his professional opinion based on being one of the world’s leading commentators since the 80’s, having worked as a booker and head of talent relations in some of the biggest and most successful wrestling companies ever. To what’s drawing? JR knows what’s drawing. AEW isn’t drawing.

2. Did you read anything you’re responding to? I addressed this. You can only polish a turd so much, and you look disingenuous if you lie to an audience and tell them it’s not a turd. JR sells what he knows should be sold.

3. You’re really going to look at the entity that is Jim Ross and suggest he is unprofessional? What’s unprofessional is the shit he often has to call. Riho’s size matters because she’s light as a feather and nothing she does looks like it hurts and there are people at home thinking that. It would be unprofessional not to call that. Don’t keep putting the same shit in front of him and expect him to call it anything other than shit. That’s common sense.

I have no clue why a company that apparently values one of the greatest calls in history thought this product would be a good thing to put in front of him. It’s like hiring Meryl Streep to play a tree. It really shows how eclectic things are run there.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> They just sold out the Revolution ppv in less than an hour. Try to keep up here.


is it actually sold out or "limited seats available" sold out?


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> They just sold out the Revolution ppv in less than an hour. Try to keep up here.


*Nah, you said maybe they should stop selling out arenas. They can't even sell out TV.*


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

I think they are doing many good things but just some things that are really irritating that are frustrating to the eyes. Even jericho has mentioned some issues but the most important thing he said is yeah this and that but its only been 8 weeks. It will take some time to iron out and try what works and does not work .He pretty much said they need more promos and more video packages so people can understand the wrestlers characters. 

NWA is a perfect example is an absolute amazing job at getting talent over. Dave and Billy could get a Mop over. They have a show driven by characters and promos.And guess what it still has wrestling,Who knew


Anyways it will come and change will happen and the numbers for people showing up to the weekly show is still good considering many things. Again even wcw and wwf did not do arenas as big as AEW is trying to do.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

shandcraig said:


> I think they are doing many good things but just some things that are really irritating that are frustrating to the eyes. Even jericho has mentioned some issues but the most important thing he said is yeah this and that but its only been 8 weeks. It will take some time to iron out and try what works and does not work .He pretty much said they need more promos and more video packages so people can understand the wrestlers characters.
> 
> NWA is a perfect example is an absolute amazing job at getting talent over. Dave and Billy could get a Mop over. They have a show driven by characters and promos.And guess what it still has wrestling,Who knew
> 
> ...


It's too bad AEW and NWA couldn't work out a working arrangement where they have talent trade, could help get NWA some eyes while giving AEW more known stars to work with.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

reyfan said:


> It's too bad AEW and NWA couldn't work out a working arrangement where they have talent trade, could help get NWA some eyes while giving AEW more known stars to work with.



This is my view but im starting to feel that these companies working together is really not helping each other out. I dont think NWA needs any help or working relationship. I think Billy learned the hard way that he needs to do his own thing.

That being said if its a small thing like say Marty is the NWA champ and randomly show sup on AEW as the champ i see that being a benefit a bit for NWA. Just long term it seems like everyones better solo

I sorta have been thinking thats what might even happen but who knows. AAA belt did show up on Dark i was reading.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> 1. JR’s “personal taste” is his professional opinion based on being one of the world’s leading commentators since the 80’s, having worked as a booker and head of talent relations in some of the biggest and most successful wrestling companies ever. To what’s drawing? JR knows what’s drawing. AEW isn’t drawing.


Professionals in the wrestling world disagree all the time on what draws. I just watched a video of Vince Russo and Disco Inferno arguing about the need for writers in a wrestling show. Cornette hates and disagrees with most of his contemporaries. JR may have an informed opinion, but it is still his opinion. And considering how much different the market is than when he was booking, you cannot say he knows what will draw without his theories being tested in that market. Otherwise, it's just conjecture.



> 2. Did you read anything you’re responding to? I addressed this. You can only polish a turd so much, and you look disingenuous if you lie to an audience and tell them it’s not a turd. JR sells what he knows should be sold.


I read it. It's just not applicable tot what we're talking about. There's a difference between calling something like you see it and criticizing the production on air. Back in the day a guy like JR would try his hardest to protect a little thing called KAYFABE. The dude would yell and scream for a "dead man" or a "demon." Well, when you lampshade all aspects of the production that you see as failing, you aren't doing anyone any favors. And to your point, why doesn't JR just flat out say "this show sucks, folk. We have a half empty crowd, and ratings are dropping"? If the idea is to be honest, why does he hide all his remarks in snide innuendo? The answer is, because it's not his damn job to opine about the show and he knows it. His job is to get things over to the TV audience.



> 3. You’re really going to look at the entity that is Jim Ross and suggest he is unprofessional? What’s unprofessional is the shit he often has to call. Riho’s size matters because she’s light as a feather and nothing she does looks like it hurts and there are people at home thinking that. It would be unprofessional not to call that. Don’t keep putting the same shit in front of him and expect him to call it anything other than shit. That’s common sense.


Yes, JR is being unprofessional. Entity or no entity. This is the same guy who used to could sell Gold Dust. What's professional about burying talent that you're supposed to get over in a friken WRESTLING SHOW? If he wants to bury her, he can become a color commentator and leave the match calling to Schiavone.The point of wrestling is the draw and get money. If JR cared about that, he wouldn't undermine people like Rhio, who is one of the few people in AEW who actually draws viewers. His personal tastes don't matter during the actual show. Save that for behind the scenes.



> I have no clue why a company that apparently values one of the greatest calls in history thought this product would be a good thing to put in front of him. It’s like hiring Meryl Streep to play a tree. It really shows how eclectic things are run there.


If Meryl Streep was hired to play a tree, she'd play the best damn tree she could. Can you say the same about JR?


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

ReekOfAwesomenesss said:


> Everything Cornette has said since week 1.


It’s eerie how correct Cornette is. For those wondering, he thinks it will be the final straw for AEW with TNT by April 15 without some major changes. But he said this week that three more shows lolenthis



DJ Punk said:


> Again, guys like Cutler and Nakazawa are not pushed. Plus, this example would work if ya know...
> 
> There were actual more talented people to sign to the roster at this point in time. But WWE has to keep their talent hostage with 5+ year contracts. This isn't as open of a market as you guys are painting it. Who is being held down and not given a fair opportunity like Cutler or Nakazawa? Whose spot are they even taking?


They could get some good guys to pad out the roster? It cheapens everything serious on top too. You also don’t need to be pushed for it to be nepotism. Erik Watts was never a main event



Cult03 said:


> You're all just a bunch of WWE fans. Just kidding, people noticed these cracks months ago and they haven't really improved since then. I hope they do because I want them to succeed and give me more entertainment. Just wishing I had some of you backing me up when I was saying the same stuff months ago.


I was with ya, buddy. 



rbl85 said:


> Well even with last night rating they are doing better than what TNT was doing before AEW.


That’s what the numbers imply on the surface, but what sort of fans are they attracting? And I’m not talking about demos, but whether or not they spend money on things that TNT value. If they’re bad consumers, maybe running a movie they own will do better for them, overall? Also, that number keeps dropping and is still below the network average. We don’t know that they didn’t expect Raw numbers (because if the idea is that it’s weekly wrestling that is actually good, why not?). We don’t know that their success in the key demo has encouraged advertisers to go with advertising on basic cable to wrestling fans, and TNT are already splitting the bill with AEW more than they normally would. Are executives getting surprisingly little back for a show with a .3 in that valued demo?

Their ratings right now are fine. They’re shit by wrestling standards, but they’re fine. It doesn’t mean TNT is happy though. More goes into this.



Papadoc81 said:


> It’s quite surprising to me how much time and effort AEW is spending on the Dark Order. It is extremely rare to hear or see anyone say anything positively about it. Not that people are negative. Just that it’s nothing really gaining all that much interest. In that way it reminds me of TNA’s aces & eights.


This is a good example of nepotism. It’s The Bucks pushing their friends. It’s also a push that isn’t working and they’re refusing to change direction. Very WWE.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> Maybe they need to stop selling out shows. They wasted almost an hour selling out Revolution — this company really is circling the drain.


I really don't think fans should bother talking about ticket sales or television views. They literally mean nothing in regards to what we are seeing week in, week out because people decide before the show whether they are going to attend or watch. Meltzer uses it as proof but Meltzer is an idiot.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> Don’t fucking pull me into this shit. I have no idea what needs to change, wrestling promotion is a little outside my wheelhouse. I just watch the shit and know what I do and don’t like. And I’m sitting here laughing my ass off at all you armchair promoters, tv producers and industry experts who think you have all the answers, when none of you know a goddamn thing more about it than I do beyond thinking what YOU want to see on a wrestling show is what everybody else wants to see.
> 
> Like I said before, I don’t give a fuck if AEW goes out of business tomorrow. I’ve lived without watching wrestling for years, I’m pretty sure I’d survive a few more without it. I enjoyed their early shows a lot, haven’t enjoyed the later ones as much. But, y’all need to read a few more of my more recent posts if you really think I’m going hard for AEW — there’s plenty I don’t like and I haven’t exactly been quiet about it. And I’m pretty sure I’d enjoy it a hell of a lot less if they ever picked up some of the utterly lame-ass ideas being thrown around here by you geniuses.


It's clear you've misinterpreted this thread, nobody is saying "follow my plan and AEW will be beating SD in ratings", people are just saying what they personally don't like about the product and what they would change-- it's literally the exact same thing the IWC has done for every other wrestling promotion since the creation of the internet, only when done for AEW it rustles jimmies for some reason. 

When people said Roman Reigns should be in the midcard and Dean Ambrose should've been the face of the company did you go "oh geez guys, I don't if I'm qualified to give an opinion on this" or did you say "yea, I agree Ambrose is much more talented and should be the star of the show"?


----------



## 45banshee (Jan 7, 2019)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207962353867919361
??


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> It's clear you've misinterpreted this thread, nobody is saying "follow my plan and AEW will be beating SD in ratings", *people are just saying what they personally don't like about the product and what they would change*-- it's literally the exact same thing the IWC has done for every other wrestling promotion since the creation of the internet, only when done for AEW it rustles jimmies for some reason.
> 
> When people said Roman Reigns should be in the midcard and Dean Ambrose should've been the face of the company did you go "oh geez guys, I don't if I'm qualified to give an opinion on this" or did you say "yea, I agree Ambrose is much more talented and should be the star of the show"?


Thank you for making my point.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Apr 21, 2014)

reyfan said:


> I personally think it's more engaging having a champion that appears to be out of his element winning over established heels, having "up and comers" losing to Dad bod Jericho adds no credibility to anyone, plus doesn't help feuds last 1 PPV then every one loses their memories and starts fighting someone else.


*I'm telling you this as a neutral viewer. If Jericho wasn't the first champ and didn't get the spotlight he does now, I wouldn't watch this show at all. His segments are easily the best part. Putting the belt on him is the greatest thing they've done. *


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

Step 1: They need to have EVERY week:
Cody, Moxley, Jericho, Omega, MJF, PAC, PAIGE (Minimum these guys) on their shows. The issue is they don't have them on their shows consistent and it's hurting them. They don't have enough roster to put a few of these guys aside for the following week. They are new so they have to showcase them weekly. There was NO MJF nor Moxley this week.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Chan Hung said:


> Step 1: They need to have EVERY week:
> Cody, Moxley, Jericho, Omega, MJF, PAC, PAIGE (Minimum these guys) on their shows. The issue is they don't have them on their shows consistent and it's hurting them. They don't have enough roster to put a few of these guys aside for the following week. They are new so they have to showcase them weekly. There was NO MJF nor Moxley this week.


For the amount they pay Mox he should be having 3 matches a show lol


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

As far as Dark Order goes they need to make them truly dark. Let's get some "Saw" type trailers and have them abduct and "torture" people and make them macabre and sadistic. Make them actually feared and get rid of the cheesy stuff they are doing to them. Actually try to inflict fear on the audience with these guys. Fear sells, look at horror movies. 

They definitely need to have all their stories happen on their TV shows and PPV's ONLY, none of this Social Media crap, not everyone goes on social media or wants to.

As far as the 6 PPV thing, I thought that should have been done since the beginning but if they don't do 6 PPV's then they should do 4 like they are now and add 2 "Super Dynamite" that are like Clash of the Champions was in old school NWA/WCW where they are like a B PPV but on free TV. 

I hate how often they have Championship matches. I've always hated this in modern wrestling, NJPW are the only ones who do it right imo. When you have too many title matches it slightly devalues the titles and especially when they are defended against nobodies. Keep the World Titles (Mens, Womens, Tag) to be defended on PPV or "Super Dynamite" and have a "TV" Belt that can be your belt that is seen and defended regularly that can be defended every 1-3 weeks. This will keep the prestige of your top belts while still having title matches on TV. 

Slightly shorter matches and more building much like @RapShepard talks about on how Raw and Nitro got to build a lot of different stories in one episode and still had plenty of matches (well Nitro did anyway)


----------



## Randy Lahey (Apr 14, 2014)

AEW should be the anti-pc, take risks, adult oriented wrestling show. They should be going after the young UFC audience, the college frat culture, and the audience that would have been watching the Attitude Era. Instead, its apparently indy geeks hiring their buddies, and doing the same garbage that has made people quit watching WWE. It's as if the current era of wrestlers hate the Attitude Era. Well, the fans of today hate what is being put out, as you see the ratings for every promotion.

So knowing their target audience is a problem. I also think ownership is an issue. Mainly because I can't see Father Khan (NFL Owner) allowing his son to do anything that might bring negative publicity to himself. So you aren't going to see AEW taking risks the way a wrestling promotion needs to in order to be popular. Getting beat in ratings by a minor league promotion like NXT is complete failure.

I mean, I'm convinced if you put an adult oriented wrestling show on something like HBO, it would do good ratings if it was written for adults. But this watered down boring garbage is never going to sell again. Ever. WWE will continue to lose viewers till they go out of business or are only on WWE Network. And AEW will do the same


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> Professionals in the wrestling world disagree all the time on what draws. I just watched a video of Vince Russo and Disco Inferno arguing about the need for writers in a wrestling show. Cornette hates and disagrees with most of his contemporaries. JR may have an informed opinion, but it is still his opinion. And considering how much different the market is than when he was booking, you cannot say he knows what will draw without his theories being tested in that market. Otherwise, it's just conjecture.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your logic is circular and it’s clear you don’t understand the terms you’re talking about.

JR understands that wrestling needs to be credible to draw. He knows what regular wrestling fans—the ones switching off—don’t want to be told. I cannot make it simpler than that. You’ve got late-WCW and every indy announcer selling everything like it’s working when it’s not. How does that work out?

Pointing out the lack of crowd or the falling ratings WOULD be unprofessional. Calling a spade a spade is not.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> @Reggie Dunlop
> @Garty
> @LongPig666
> 
> ...


Of course we don't work for AEW. Why would we be trying to sell you, on such a crappy product, no talent. Omega's booking, the lack of a women's division, too many tag-teams, too many flippy guys, no-name guys who just appear for no reason, Brandi segments, better pyro, more pyro but not too much and of course, soon going out of business. As you can see, there are many subjects that you can choose to discuss amongst yourselves, but I see that you guys are doing a great job on your own. We're just here to help.

As I keep stating to you and everyone else that shits on AEW day-in and day-out, post after post, 24 hours a day, YOU'RE NOT SAYING ANYTHING NEW OR DIFFERENT. YOUR OPINIONS ARE THE SAME TALKING POINTS THAT DOZENS OF USERS HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. That is the reason that you'll never get a response. You've argued for 12 weeks and exhausted every possible topic. There's just no point anymore because you guys will NEVER be satisfied, no matter if changes are made or not. You'll just find something else to focus on. It's become an obsession for you guys.

Think about it this way then...

What is the one constant that has been across all media platforms (digital, print, online, TV, etc) for the past 3 years now? It shouldn't be that difficult to figure it out. President Trump. Like him or hate him. Voted for him, or didn't vote for him. Agree or disagree with him. It all doesn't matter, he's the President. What the problem is, is the 24/7, 365 barrage of rhetoric. Stories, talking segments, opinions, "experts" and anything else they can dream up. Over those 3 years, he's been called a racist, a white supremacist, a ****-phobe, stupid, mental, crazy, Islam-a-phobe, "worse than Hitler", hates Mexicans, hates blacks, "climate change" denier, any and all immigrants and of course, a xenophobe. These talking points have been mentioned every day for 3 years, since day 1 of his Presidency and Inauguration. They all say the same things over and over each day. You'd think they'd stop after 1 year? Maybe 2 years? Probably. 3 years now and still it continues on? People are sick and tired of hearing about Trump 24/7 and the ratings for cable news networks (except Fox News) have fallen by hundreds of thousands of viewers. People can only listen and read for so long, before they've finally, had enough.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

Garty said:


> Of course we don't work for AEW. Why would we be trying to sell you, on such a crappy product, no talent. Omega's booking, the lack of a women's division, too many tag-teams, too many flippy guys, no-name guys who just appear for no reason, Brandi segments, better pyro, more pyro but not too much and of course, soon going out of business. As you can see, there are many subjects that you can choose to discuss amongst yourselves, but I see that you guys are doing a great job on your own. We're just here to help.
> 
> As I keep stating to you and everyone else that shits on AEW day-in and day-out, post after post, 24 hours a day, YOU'RE NOT SAYING ANYTHING NEW OR DIFFERENT. YOUR OPINIONS ARE THE SAME TALKING POINTS THAT DOZENS OF USERS HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. IT'S JUST BEING REPEATED OVER AND OVER. That is the reason that you'll never get a response. You've argued for 12 weeks and exhausted every possible topic. There's just no point anymore because you guys will NEVER be satisfied, no matter if changes are made or not. You'll just find something else to focus on. It's become an obsession for you guys.
> 
> ...


The IWC shat on WWE every day for 12 years but 12 weeks is too much for AEW? 

There are dozens of people posting in this thread, some of them have AEW avs and sigs, what's more likely, that every single one of them is an AEW hater, or maybe AEW just isn't a perfect product?


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

elidrakefan76 said:


> Showcasing too much talent with generic looks that look like they belong on the indies and not on national television. Marko Stunt, Private Party, Joey Janela, Darby Allin, Jungle Boy, Butcher and the Blade, Dark Order and most of their women's division all come to mind. Having a good and unique look is a big part of getting over with fans/making people want to tune in in addition to being good in the ring. AEW needs to sign more guys who look like stars.


I've been saying that since they started the promotion. Instead of signing Cain Velasquez ( name recognition/ background), Killer Kross, Hammerstone, Jacob Fatu, Big Time Bill Collier, El Torro Blanco Rush & Dragon Lee, Bandido & Flamito, Edge Stone ( green but that kid has star potential), Lokomotiv Ivan Markov ( he may need a work visa), MVP w/ Lock & Loaded (they work together). They had the opportunity to get Austin Theory but chose Darby Allin instead. 

The only guys who look like wise picks were Lucha Bros., PNP, Guevara Jake Hager, Scorpio Sky ( Cinderella Man gimmick that they wasted in a 2 week storyline), Trent (he needs to drop Chuckie T & Orange Cassidy), Luchasaurus & Jungle Boy( before being straddled with Marko Stunt), MJF, Shawn Spears ( victim of bad booking and hot shotting storylines, remember the inner circle was supposed to be his faction before transferring to Jericho & was supposed to have Wardlow as his bodyguard, before being demoted to jobber status AGAIN), 

The Dark Order was a reclamation project and instead of seeing if fans would now accept them they are hotshotted into a major storyline that just turned everybody off. Stu Grayson is a decent lower mud card talent but Evil Uno sucks and they are trying to push him as a major star ( that's inept booking). 

Kip Sabian was on the brink of being a break out star and then he was signed by AEW and us now generic jobber #1. The Hybrid 2 were once a great tag team have been reduced to enhancement talent. Marcus Quinn needs to be a singles wrestler used on Dark and lose that ridiculous ring gear he wears. 

Riho as champ is a joke, when you have Shida sitting right next to her. Emi Sakurai should have never made TV other than to be enhancement talent. You had the opportunity to sign Nicole Savoy & Ivelisse but didn't.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

This. For years I read how people thought he was the greatest wrestler alive, if you've only seen him on AEW then he looks like another mid-carder that has matches that go too long.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1208005678238969866


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

How many people on this forum said that they hoped that Omega would not be booked strong right at the start ?
A LOT.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

rbl85 said:


> How many people on this forum said that they hoped that Omega would not be booked strong right at the start ?
> A LOT.


There is a difference between not being booked strong and being booked like a complete after thought.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

reyfan said:


> There is a difference between not being booked strong and being booked like a complete after thought.


They need an other title, like this even if Omega is not feuding for the world championship belt he can still feud for a belt and maybe win it until it's his time to feud for the WC belt.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> The IWC shat on WWE every day for 12 years but 12 weeks is too much for AEW?
> 
> There are dozens of people posting in this thread, some of them have AEW avs and sigs, what's more likely, that every single one of them is an AEW hater, or maybe AEW just isn't a perfect product?


Of course WWE had haters for 12 years... there was no competition to go up against. December 2018. Steph, HHH, Shane and Vince were on Raw, telling the entire world that "we haven't been doing our job", "we need to listen to the fans and give them what they want", "there are no middle managers" and the kicker, "you're going to see new Superstars, new faces, new match-ups" and here they are now, December 2019. What has changed? Anything? Who was on top last year, that isn't still at the top this year? What about the matches? With a WWE main-roster of approximately 70 males and 40 females (neither including NXT), how many of them have been given the spotlight, to have their own matches, away from the top talent? Has there been any new faces involved in the main-event scene and not just "there" to give someone something to do? WWE has, arguably, the best talent roster in the world (and they still want more), yet those same faces are still on top, the match-ups are still the same and to no one's surprise, nothing has changed.

But this isn't about WWE.

Of course there are AEW haters. Also not surprising, this majority of haters make up about 80% on what is written, what is said, what is inferred, what is deemed, what is good, what is bad, what is true and lastly, why we're wrong. I don't think there's anyone here that says AEW is all rainbows and unicorns, when it's obviously not true. Are there some tweaks, changes, tightening-up and a stronger focus needed? Yes. But day after day, we hear the same complaints over and over again. Everything that needs to be said, has already been said, hundreds of times over already. So what's left to discuss then? If you don't like AEW, then don't watch AEW. If AEW isn't for you, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like AEW talent, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like what AEW is doing, then don't watch AEW. People keep hammering home, that AEW needs to make all sorts of changes, find better talent, acquire big-name talent, disband the women's division, what to do with Omega, firing all useless vanilla midgets, less tag-teams, etc. etc. Have any of these "issues" (in your opinion), been corrected, refined, replaced or dropped? If your answer to any of these is no, then don't watch AEW. Things may change. Things may not change. If AEW are willing to make changes, would it be satisfactory enough for the masses? Probably not. This is why I say, don't watch AEW.


----------



## Marbar (Dec 20, 2019)

The dark order vignettes were intriguing but the dark order is a complete mess (even worse than brandy). AEW need to push stars with charisma that are going to draw viewers. They have a strong core of wrestlers which are not being utilized so they can give tv time to garbage acts. Shorten some of the matches, get rid of 90% of the flippy shit, give us some old school grapplers and ditch multiple kick outs in every match. Entertain me like you did for the first few episodes. To be quite honest I'm starting to lose interest in what I thought could be wrestlings saving grace. I stopped watching wrestling when Vince created his monopoly because it became redundit as hell. The elite really need to get their shit together or the bleeding will continue. Dump the garbage and focus on what will attract viewers.


----------



## Deathiscoming (Feb 1, 2019)

The most succinct way to put where AEW is going wrong would be...."AEW is shit. Shit stinks" . Stop being shit and stop stinking.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

Riho the Women's champ who doesn't wrestle. 

Endless number 1 contender matches for Women's title. When we all know they're going to put the title on Baker.

Dynamite Diamond ring instead of a midcard title. Was utterly pointless. Meaning half the roster has very little to do. 

Ex WWE guys who are utterly pointless like Hager and Spears. 

Too much flippy floppy tag team matches. 

Too many pointless stables like Dark Order and Butcher/Blade. 

Too many Elite guys getting big pushes.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

the_flock said:


> Riho the Women's champ who doesn't wrestle.
> 
> Endless number 1 contender matches for Women's title. When we all know they're going to put the title on Baker.
> 
> ...


If i remember correctly they couldn't put him in a match because of bellator.

Also can you tell me who are the Elite guys who are getting big pushes ?


----------



## JBLGOAT (Mar 24, 2014)

Even if there are lots of things people don't like. The worse thing is to have a reboot. WCW rebooted every three months. They need to shorten a match here. Add an angle there... Job out talents on the way out. Midnight was put over Booker T and then left.

I think people are mainly disappointed that Tony Khan isn't throwing money at the screen


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

JBLGOAT said:


> Even if there are lots of things people don't like. The worse thing is to have a reboot. WCW rebooted every three months. They need to shorten a match here. Add an angle there... Job out talents on the way out. Midnight was put over Booker T and then left.
> 
> *I think people are mainly disappointed that Tony Khan isn't throwing money at the screen*


Khan does not have an unlimited budget


----------



## The XL 2 (Sep 13, 2016)

They'd be doing 300K if Jericho wasn't the champ. He's literally carrying this program preventing its death. He must be pissed as fuck, I'm sure he doesn't want to be percieved as the face of a dying brand.


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

Another thing i want to ADD is that while AEW does have some okay storylines, they have to avoid random matches. This is what is hurting the WWE. People want to see matches that get them engaged..ie...Cody vs Dustin, shit like that. When it's just two teams against each other randomly or with hardly any reason to care, then the audience cares less. It needs to be stressed that there has to be more promo time, more character development time and add a good story as to why the matches are happening. If you just keep the whole match vs match stuff, they will NEVER GROW and keep the base only . IF AEW relies only on their base, say goodbye to TNT. THUS, ....They need to grow outside their base.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

The XL 2 said:


> They'd be doing 300K if Jericho wasn't the champ. He's literally carrying this program preventing its death. He must be pissed as fuck, I'm sure he doesn't want to be percieved as the face of a dying brand.


I don't think he cares all that much. If he did he'd have gotten himself into better shape.


----------



## bmack086 (Aug 21, 2015)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> It needs a booker and not Tony Khan. He's a fan boy. Sure he can have final say as it is his (daddy's) money, but they totally shit on the idea of proper storytelling and that writing is a skill and art in and of itself. Wrestlers as the bookers might have been a romantic idea, but Dusty and the like were not booking for 2 hours of television a week with a roster of 80 wrestlers.
> 
> No booker in their right mind would have booked Kenny Omega like he has booked himself. No booker would have allowed Cody Rhodes to book himself out of ever getting a title shot. No booker would have put the titles on SCU when Bucks, Lucha Brothers were the two biggest tag names in the world. And then add in former LAX. Cody made a big show of booking him out of the title, but then books him to be centrally involved in half a dozen storylines at once. The never fight for a title was virtue signalling, while then booking himself into every storyline and giving himself an epic entrance for even regular television.
> 
> ...


I mean honestly... all of this. Omega was the biggest (non-WWE) star they had/have and look what they’ve done with him. The majority of the roster looks like fanboy marks that became wrestlers.

They should have come out swinging with their big hitters and slowly build up the guys under them. Instead we have midcard - to be nice - guys hanging with your World Champ, who needs interference just to survive. They are trying to book everyone to look strong, and they are booking guys strong that no one cares about.

Jericho, Cody, Omega, Pac, Mox, Page, MJF, The Bucks, Luchas, and to an extent LAX are their stars. Those are the guys that should be clearly superior to the rest of the roster. And then they need to create a midcard title so you can begin developing the rest of the roster.

And yeah, there’s way too much wrestling as it is to be following Dark and their online shit. So, someone like me who doesn’t watch that, is missing like 50% of the storylines. It’s dumb af.


----------



## cease2exist (Apr 16, 2014)

I stopped watching it a couple of weeks ago. JR was one of the only things that kept me watching for the last week or two I did watch. But the show itself just doesn't entertain me enough, I don't think it's awful but I'd rather sit down and watch a show on netflix at this point.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

Garty said:


> Of course WWE had haters for 12 years... there was no competition to go up against. December 2018. Steph, HHH, Shane and Vince were on Raw, telling the entire world that "we haven't been doing our job", "we need to listen to the fans and give them what they want", "there are no middle managers" and the kicker, "you're going to see new Superstars, new faces, new match-ups" and here they are now, December 2019. What has changed? Anything? Who was on top last year, that isn't still at the top this year? What about the matches? With a WWE main-roster of approximately 70 males and 40 females (neither including NXT), how many of them have been given the spotlight, to have their own matches, away from the top talent? Has there been any new faces involved in the main-event scene and not just "there" to give someone something to do? WWE has, arguably, the best talent roster in the world (and they still want more), yet those same faces are still on top, the match-ups are still the same and to no one's surprise, nothing has changed.
> 
> But this isn't about WWE.
> 
> Of course there are AEW haters. Also not surprising, this majority of haters make up about 80% on what is written, what is said, what is inferred, what is deemed, what is good, what is bad, what is true and lastly, why we're wrong. I don't think there's anyone here that says AEW is all rainbows and unicorns, when it's obviously not true. Are there some tweaks, changes, tightening-up and a stronger focus needed? Yes. But day after day, we hear the same complaints over and over again. Everything that needs to be said, has already been said, hundreds of times over already. So what's left to discuss then? If you don't like AEW, then don't watch AEW. If AEW isn't for you, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like AEW talent, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like what AEW is doing, then don't watch AEW. People keep hammering home, that AEW needs to make all sorts of changes, find better talent, acquire big-name talent, disband the women's division, what to do with Omega, firing all useless vanilla midgets, less tag-teams, etc. etc. Have any of these "issues" (in your opinion), been corrected, refined, replaced or dropped? If your answer to any of these is no, then don't watch AEW. Things may change. Things may not change. If AEW are willing to make changes, would it be satisfactory enough for the masses? Probably not. This is why I say, don't watch AEW.


Although I typically disagree with your posts this one has some merit and some good talking points to it. I disagree though about the comparisons. AEW has shown they are willing to make changes meanwhile WWE has not. WWE MAY start to make some changes if AEW gets to the point of being strong but as of now I don't think WWE is too worried, a little sure, but not too much at this point. 

I think what happened is that a lot of the people who are disgruntled a bit with AEW feels that they didn't live up to the hype and expected something more, we didn't expect it to be what it has become. What we wanted/expected was a true alternative that could eventually match or beat WWE or possibly usher in boom. Was that unrealistic? Perhaps, but we bought the hype AEW threw out and they aren't living up to that hype in most of our opinions. Granted they said they aren't trying to beat WWE so they are not lying to us about that but we wanted a true alternative, something that doesn't make the same mistakes WWE does, something that doesn't insult our intelligence, something that can grow into something special. 

Now I'm not on the "they're already doomed!" mindset...YET...but if they keep spiraling downwards then it would be relatively safe to say that they hit their ceiling and although there will be an alternative, it is not the alternative many of us were hoping for. This is where the "vanity project" argument comes from. AEW seems to be catering to the minority, instead of the majority of lapsed fans who want a proper alternative. They also seem to primarily want to hire their friends and family and give pushes to people based on personal bias and not on drawing power or star potential ( a couple of exceptions.) It's business 101 really, you try to reach as many people as possible to make the most money possible but it seems, not saying is, they only care about doing what they like and what they think is "cool" instead of the majority. Sorry but that is not a successful way to run a business that you want to grow. Now if they're cool with just catering to the hardcores and the social media crowd and breaking even then by all means they can keep doing what they're doing.

I still think as a whole we need to wait till the end of 2020 to judge what will happen or where their "place" is but the numbers DO show that it is not growing and in fact is slowly bleeding. I would hope/think that AEW will see this and do something to rectify their losses before it's too late, they have shown evidence that they are willing to make changes so I have hopes that they will in 2020.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Your logic is circular and it’s clear you don’t understand the terms you’re talking about.


What's circular about saying burying an angle live on air makes people less interested in the product? What's circular about saying JR's approach is indeed burying certain aspects of the show? What's circular about saying that if JR had the same approach with WWE gimmicks the like Undertaker and Kane, he'd undermine a good thing? Sounds like you're attempting to bring in logic based buzzwords to hide the simple fact that your argument lacks any consistency and ultimately makes no rational sense.

Do yourself a favor. Imagine this shoot style of commentary on a show you actually wanted to be succeed. AE WWF perhaps(if you were even alive then). Do you think WWF would have done well if their top commentator was constantly burying all the stupid crap( and there was *a lot *of stupid crap during that time) that he saw in the ring, killing kayfabe in the process? If you say that would be okay, then you're either being dishonest or YOU are the one who doesn't know the terms you're talking about.




> JR understands that wrestling needs to be credible to draw. He knows what regular wrestling fans—the ones switching off—don’t want to be told. I cannot make it simpler than that. You’ve got late-WCW and every indy announcer selling everything like it’s working when it’s not. How does that work out?


This isn't an issue of what fans don't want to be told. It's an issue of what fans don't need to hear. JR down right denigrating the product on air doesn't draw. Period. No one but the smarkiest smarks are watching the show because JR is lampshading stuff they might not have noticed otherwise. No one is watching the show because of JR's audible eye-rolling and innuendo. JR's opinion isn't getting anything over. His selling the show is what got him and his shows over. Most people didn't even know JR's shoot opinion on things until YouTube and podcasts.

And I'm not saying he has to sell all the crap. But he doesn't need to bury the show in commentary either.



> Pointing out the lack of crowd or the falling ratings WOULD be unprofessional. Calling a spade a spade is not.


You make the mistake of assuming that being honest and being unprofessional are mutually exclusive. Well, pointing to a lack of a crowd would be calling a spade a spade too. Why bother making a distinction between that and constantly burying one of your few on air draws in Rhio if both have the same negative effect?

If JR's job is to help AEW, then it means that his job is to increase the number of eyes on the show. When he's on TV, it involves a completely different strategy than when he's backstage. This is common sense.
.
Simply put, commentary isn't the time or place to air your shoot grievances. That crap wouldn't fly in WWE, and you know it.


----------



## IronMan8 (Dec 25, 2015)

I ended up watching the end of Dynamite this week to see what all the fuss was about concerning Dark Order. I actually enjoyed the concept, but the execution was piss poor. It looks cheap, unorganised, unpolished - just messy and amateurish. If they shot this angle with experts in charge directing everyone around and knowing how to make it work for the camera, it could've been good. 

Their storytelling is excellent, but it's very subtle and uncoordinated, so it gets lost. For example, the tease about why Hangman wasn't out there to fight Dark Order was just 1 line from a commentator. If this was a key point, there's several other ways to get that over in a coordinated effort.


----------



## Marbar (Dec 20, 2019)

They need to focus less on the hyped comments about crushing WWE and nut up or shut up. This is where the hard work needs to begin. Stop resting on your laurels and prove the haters wrong. You have a solid roster based on limited availability so utilize them. Focus on quality instead of quantity when making signings. Most of the moves they make seem like they are trying to build up their entourage of sycophants. In the long term that could very well lead to ruin


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

The issue with Kenny is not about being booked weak or strong but the lack of story telling happening with him. I thought we was getting some interesting story building to something with him but i dont see it anymore.

Whats the payoff here of him losing matches and then winning some ?Its just a flip flop like the spot matches. We need payoffs we need character development. I see a great roster with guys waiting or wanting to develop a story and either they dont know how or the AEW direction is preventing that.

I keep seeing hits of change and character progress in guys and then its gone and then again it comes back and then nothing happens and then all the sudden some big change happens.


Either way they are a new company and the bookers have never been bookers and have never been story tellers and mostly had other people feeding them the direction and story.So since its new they will learn im sure and this will come in time.Its just something i think a lot of people are noticing a lack of. The old days this is what drive successful and drive characters and drove match payoffs.

WE NEED PAYOFFS. I have high hopes that they will figure it out and AEW will get really good.They have so much potential

this is what wwe has lost for 10 years now and it reflects the continuous decline of fan base in those 10 years.


----------



## IronMan8 (Dec 25, 2015)

DOTL said:


> What's circular about saying burying an angle live on air makes people less interested in the product? What's circular about saying JR's approach is indeed burying certain aspects of the show? What's circular about saying that if JR had the same approach with WWE gimmicks the like Undertaker and Kane, he'd undermine a good thing? Sounds like you're attempting to bring in logic based buzzwords to hide the simple fact that your argument lacks any consistency and ultimately makes no rational sense.
> 
> Do yourself a favor. Imagine this shoot style of commentary on a show you actually wanted to be succeed. AE WWF perhaps(if you were even alive then). Do you think WWF would have done well if their top commentator was constantly burying all the stupid crap( and there was *a lot *of stupid crap during that time) that he saw in the ring, killing kayfabe in the process? If you say that would be okay, then you're either being dishonest or YOU are the one who doesn't know the terms you're talking about.
> 
> ...


On the contrary, JR's honesty on-air echoes the common sense questions that I'm often thinking, and it makes me feel sane. Without him pointing it out, I would feel zero sense of inclusion with the AEW product, I'd literally turn into one of those people who genuinely thinks wrestling fans are *(whatever)* and can't relate.


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

Ok, in all seriousness, what I think AEW needs more than anything else is more in-ring time for their talent, especially the newer people. Every week that goes by it becomes more and more obvious that most of them are simply not as comfortable as they need to be with whoever they’re in the ring with. So many of them have these really slick move sets, but they lack the experience to know how to put together truly great matches. That’s why things look forced and blatantly set-up. That means knowing when to go 20 minutes vs 5 or less; how to pace a match; how to smoothly transition from move to move, hold to hold, spot to spot, offense to selling. That means practice time, strong coaching from real seasoned ring veterans, and much more actual performance time than what they get from one tv show a week. Fix stuff like this, and I think it will make up for many of the other weaknesses. As I’ve said in a few other threads, there’s so much more to putting on a good show than throwing out a bunch of slick spots.

THAT DOESN’T MEAN GET RID OF THE SPOT-FESTS AND FILL THE TIME WITH FUCKING PROMOS; it means a lot of their talent need to get back to wrestling fundamentals and learn how to build good matches. First and foremost. That’s missing with at least 3/4 of the roster, and it makes all the other faults just stand out even more. More experienced guys in the locker room would also help a lot with correcting this.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T (Jun 17, 2014)

How is this a discussion, a commentator has one job: get things over. The story, a character, how painful a move is. A commentator's job isn't to be unbiased, they should never be burying the on-screen product, that's some Vince McMahon, carny type shit.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> Ok, in all seriousness, what I think AEW needs more than anything else is more in-ring time for their talent, especially the newer people. Every week that goes by it becomes more and more obvious that most of them are simply not as comfortable as they need to be with whoever they’re in the ring with. So many of them have these really slick move sets, but they lack the experience to know how to put together truly great matches. That’s why things look forced and blatantly set-up. That means knowing when to go 20 minutes vs 5 or less; how to pace a match; how to smoothly transition from move to move, hold to hold, spot to spot, offense to selling. That means practice time, strong coaching from real seasoned ring veterans, and much more actual performance time than what they get from one tv show a week. Fix stuff like this, and I think it will make up for many of the other weaknesses. As I’ve said in a few other threads, there’s so much more to putting on a good show than throwing out a bunch of slick spots.
> 
> THAT DOESN’T MEAN GET RID OF THE SPOT-FESTS AND FILL THE TIME WITH FUCKING PROMOS; it means a lot of their talent need to get back to wrestling fundamentals and learn how to build good matches. First and foremost. That’s missing with at least 3/4 of the roster, and it makes all the other faults just stand out even more. More experienced guys in the locker room would also help a lot with correcting this.



You get almost everyone showing some interesting character development and story telling and its exciting and then its gone and they disappear and then they reappear and it happens again. Its fucking stupid 

So i agree with you.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Garty said:


> Of course WWE had haters for 12 years... there was no competition to go up against. December 2018. Steph, HHH, Shane and Vince were on Raw, telling the entire world that "we haven't been doing our job", "we need to listen to the fans and give them what they want", "there are no middle managers" and the kicker, "you're going to see new Superstars, new faces, new match-ups" and here they are now, December 2019. What has changed? Anything? Who was on top last year, that isn't still at the top this year? What about the matches? With a WWE main-roster of approximately 70 males and 40 females (neither including NXT), how many of them have been given the spotlight, to have their own matches, away from the top talent? Has there been any new faces involved in the main-event scene and not just "there" to give someone something to do? WWE has, arguably, the best talent roster in the world (and they still want more), yet those same faces are still on top, the match-ups are still the same and to no one's surprise, nothing has changed.
> 
> But this isn't about WWE.
> 
> Of course there are AEW haters. Also not surprising, this majority of haters make up about 80% on what is written, what is said, what is inferred, what is deemed, what is good, what is bad, what is true and lastly, why we're wrong. I don't think there's anyone here that says AEW is all rainbows and unicorns, when it's obviously not true. Are there some tweaks, changes, tightening-up and a stronger focus needed? Yes. But day after day, we hear the same complaints over and over again. Everything that needs to be said, has already been said, hundreds of times over already. So what's left to discuss then? If you don't like AEW, then don't watch AEW. If AEW isn't for you, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like AEW talent, then don't watch AEW. If you don't like what AEW is doing, then don't watch AEW. People keep hammering home, that AEW needs to make all sorts of changes, find better talent, acquire big-name talent, disband the women's division, what to do with Omega, firing all useless vanilla midgets, less tag-teams, etc. etc. Have any of these "issues" (in your opinion), been corrected, refined, replaced or dropped? If your answer to any of these is no, then don't watch AEW. Things may change. Things may not change. If AEW are willing to make changes, would it be satisfactory enough for the masses? Probably not. This is why I say, don't watch AEW.


I am speaking for myself, and myself only, but I am one of those that disappeared from the 12 million wrestling audiences from the Monday Night Wars.

I was told a new company was being started by Rhodes that had Jericho and JR attached. My ears perked up, then I heard it was just PPVs. I quelled my optimism.

Then I heard it was going to be on TNT. I marked the fuck out and instantly was transformed from a diehard 35 year old hoops fanatic to watching every YouTube clip I could find on the roster. Once the shows started, I really, really got into it. I gave my wife, who has never watched wrestling, and children, who I certainly wasn’t going to let watch WWE, tickets to the show in Charleston, WV. I had to work, so I missed the show live. Her and the children fell in love.

I was again out of town for work during Full Gear, but we all watched the PPV together, FaceTiming after every match. She stayed up nearly an hour and a half after Omega/Moxley with me discussing how intense that was.

I understand and prefer Omega to chase. I view him as the new Sting. He is the guy that should be The Franchise. The one guy that had WWE begging for him to come, offering big money and big storylines that would have likely involved him with Rollins/Reigns/Styles.

Post Full Gear, all we have got is Omega in random matches. No real story-telling. Still not a single live promo. Still kind of directionless. Yet, with Cody, we have a very clear picture as to what he’s doing, because he makes sure to get match time, promo time, etc. He’s worked ONE Dark match to Omega’s 3 or 4.

I want the COMPANY to do well. And the one thing they had to offer US audiences when entering weekly television that most of us had never seen was Kenny Omega, the greatest wrestler alive, Best Bout Machine, Mr 7 Stars.

And since Full Gear all we’ve got is a midcard guy. If you turned on Dynamite and saw Omega, what differentiates him from even a guy like Trent or Scorpio Sky? Really think about that.

That’s how bad it’s been. They killed the ONE “something” they had to offer that people had never seen, only heard of.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

How do you give more ring time to everybody ?


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

^As would house shows. But Cody has said House Shows are a dated concept and AEW won't be doing any. So as a result AEW wrestling will never be as good or smooth as other major companies outside when two 10+ year vets with a lot of television experience go at it. 

TJ Perkins recently gave an interview where every camera angle was planned out with the wrestlers in the match from the moment they step through the curtain to the moment they step back through at the end of the segment. Where moves happen in the ring, where they look after the move - which camera will be live etc. In WWE it's not just pre-planning the match, it's where each move will be and beyond. 

Also in NXT the wrestlers work on their Takeover matches complete run through in the PC in the lead up to the PPV match. It was a major criticism of main roster wrestlers when NXT wrestlers were getting all the MOTY mentions and glory. I specifically remember a clapback being made on twitter that sure Bayley vs Sasha Banks was great because they worked it completely 3-4 times in the PC in the days before.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

AEW can't afford to lose more money with house shows.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

IronMan8 said:


> On the contrary, JR's honesty on-air echoes the common sense questions that I'm often thinking, and it makes me feel sane. Without him pointing it out, I would feel zero sense of inclusion with the AEW product, I'd literally turn into one of those people who genuinely thinks wrestling fans are *(whatever)* and can't relate.


This is anecdotal. And the type of heat you're talking about isn't the kind that makes you want to buy a ticket or a shirt, is it? You can't hear JR's commentary at a live event.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

Jim Ross is part of the show. He's a paid "actor" just like the wrestlers in the ring. Period. Now does he look stupid trying to defend the shit - absolutely. Just like referees look stupid when they don't call the rules properly because the wrestlers just freelance too often. Anything seen on camera is part of the show.


----------



## fabi1982 (Jun 28, 2011)

Honesty besides some usual stupid comments this seems to be the most productive AEW thread I have seen since they debuted.

Mostly everything have been said already.


they need a booker
Kenny massively underused even if he wants this
Cody always shown as something special, this needs to stop, its not about him, it felt special with his entrance the first couple times but for a tag with Darby it doesnt need the lights out shit
useless matches need to stop, this stopped a lot of people watching WWE and I thought they wanted to be different

They just need to change some things because the first couple weeks seemed important, now it is, as others said, just a glorified house show.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

I was excited they were going with Pac and Nakazawa. It was something.

Then we never see anymore of it. Lmao


----------



## Reggie Dunlop (Nov 2, 2015)

bdon said:


> I am speaking for myself, and myself only, but I am one of those that disappeared from the 12 million wrestling audiences from the Monday Night Wars.
> 
> I was told a new company was being started by Rhodes that had Jericho and JR attached. My ears perked up, then I heard it was just PPVs. I quelled my optimism.
> 
> ...


I honestly think Omega is just trying too hard to not hog the spotlight in order to give the newer guys a chance to rise. The logic there being to create a bigger pond that he’ll eventually be the big fish in. Unfortunately there are only two or three of the relative unknowns on the roster who’ve shown any real potential so far, and there aren’t enough others to keep new fans interested while they’re coming up and/or better known names join the company. In other words, I’m thinking there’s a very long-term objective here that should pay off ... if we can get through this somewhat awkward and uncomfortable development period first.

But I’ll tell ya what else I’m seeing, as highly acclaimed as Omega was coming into this, I think he needs some work himself on his tv presentation. Some of the stuff he does is great for the once-a-month shows he used to do in Japan, but it wears thin and just doesn’t fly as well seeing the same silly gestures and antics week after week. Somebody backstage needs to step up and offer some constructive criticism in that regard if he can’t see it himself. Because, story lines aside, I’m just not as impressed with him here as I thought I’d be. Yet.


----------



## Dizzie (Jun 22, 2019)

Ive wanted to get invested in wrestling show again but It just feels so bland.

Question have to be asked about creative when shows like lucha underground and impact wrestling of recent times made better use of talent than what aew is, aew have guys that impact wrestling would love to have like omega, pac and the young bucks and yet I find them uninteresting with little character to them aside from being good in the ring, I'm finding rvd who has never been known as good promo guy more interesting from what i have seen on youtube than the likes of aew names I mentioned.


----------



## Gh0stFace (Oct 10, 2019)

They've made some mistakes (like not putting the belts on Bucks in the last show or having Page lead the Dark Order) but nowhere near the level of unwatchable BS WWE makes us bear with during RAW & Smackdown


----------



## lagofala (Jun 22, 2016)

Cody has to be more ruthless.

Problem is Cody still has that chip on his shoulder. Yes he has proven he is a draw and was definitely under used in WWE. Problem is that he now sympathizes with everyone else that way.

There's a reason why Shawn Spears and Jake Hagger were released.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

lagofala said:


> Cody has to be more ruthless.
> 
> Problem is Cody still has that chip on his shoulder. Yes he has proven he is a draw and was definitely under used in WWE. Problem is that he now sympathizes with everyone else that way.
> 
> There's a reason why Shawn Spears and Jake Hagger were released.


Both Spears and Hager have asked for their release. Spears is fine mid card guy. But Hager was a great signing he looks like a stud. He's doing great in Diesel role. He's gonna be big asset for AEW once he starts wrestling. There's very little difference from Hager or Ziggler or Miz. Difference is he left company and those guys got more mid card pushes.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

imthegame19 said:


> Both Spears and Hager have asked for their release. Spears is fine mid card guy. But Hager was a great signing he looks like a stud. He's doing great in Diesel role. He's gonna be big asset for AEW once he starts wrestling. There's very little difference from Hager or Ziggler or Miz. Difference is he left company and those guys got more mid card pushes.


I bet Hagger is loving getting paid just to stand there and add nothing to the product, if they are going to both to sign people they should actually use them.


----------



## Marbar (Dec 20, 2019)

I would love to see hagar and luchasaurus in a match together.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

reyfan said:


> I bet Hagger is loving getting paid just to stand there and add nothing to the product, if they are going to both to sign people they should actually use them.


They clearly plan to use him and have him wrestle. Hager has talked about guys he wants to wrestle. While there teasing matches with him vs Dustin and Luchurarous. So that tells me there was something in his MMA deal that wouldn't allow him to wrestle thus far. But once January 1st show comes it will be over 2 months since his last MMA fight. So I'm guessing this won't last much longer and they will start using him.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

lagofala said:


> Cody has to be more ruthless.
> 
> Problem is Cody still has that chip on his shoulder. Yes he has proven he is a draw and was definitely under used in WWE. Problem is that he now sympathizes with everyone else that way.
> 
> There's a reason why Shawn Spears and Jake Hagger were released.



Agree his bed wetter promos week after week to feel sorry for him is pathetic. Hes got a chip on his shoulder grab your fucking nuts and giver.

If i see ine my promo of him crying and mentioning everyone in his family i swear.

Days of our lives


----------



## zkorejo (Jul 2, 2010)

AEW had been doing everything fine until the last PPV. Until then the only complaint I had was, not every match needs to be a 20 min long match, more story development than in-ring action and they fixed it. 

Since the last PPV, the problem now is that they cant stick to the main storyline until the PPV payoff. Dont sidetrack so much that people forget what actually is the storyline. I get it, the next PPV is in 3-4 months or so, but you have to keep building that feud atleast somewhat. 

The general direction changed so much that it feels like a new season or something rather than a continuation from the last PPV. What happened to Dustin vs Swagger? It feels like they dropped it for no reason. Since when is MJF a Brock lesnar who only is there every other week? Why isnt Moley always front and center of each episode? What happened to The Elite vs Inner Circle, faction vs faction match that Cody talked about in his promo? The Match Beyond? Is it not happening, then why did they announce it?

Didnt MJF and Jericho hug? Did he join the Inner Circle?.. No instead he hired blade and butcher and bunny and whoever to attack Cody. 

Kenny collecting wins is fine, but stop letting him do goofy stuff, it doesnt go with his "trying to get back in form" thing. 

I think they should be clear with what the storylines are for the next PPV and start building them in a structured way. On the show, not on some TNT special or BTE. These storylines should be built on the main show. These are more important than some stupid Brandi storyline with 2 undeserving segments. 

Im not shitting on AEW... but I just think it is not as good as it was prior to Full Gear with its storytelling.


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

I guess the Honey moon phase of AEW is running its course. Its now time for them to switch it up on New Years and get things going. Hopefully this short time away gives them time to rethink some things.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

rbl85 said:


> AEW can't afford to lose more money with house shows.


You're aware house shows are relatively inexpensive when talent is contracted, right?

A 1000-2000 seat arena is maybe 2-3 thousand dollars, a small advertising campaign locally could hit everywhere for a long time for around 10k (A lot would come for free because they have legitimate stars). Lets say the rest of the misc costs put it up to 20k. 

Ringside seating for 40 bucks. Sell 75 of them. $3000.00 right there.

Floor seating 30 bucks. Lets say you've got 600 of these seats. 30 X 600 = $18,000. At this point you've made your money back from selling around 700 seats.

Cheap seats 20 bucks. Lets say you've got another 825 of these seats. 20 X 825 = $16,500

Total expense: $20.000

Total made: $37,500

That's off a 1500 seat building and of the assumption that it's in a relatively decent area. If they ran large high school gyms like other indies do they could cut that 20k down significantly and take even more away from it all.

My figures don't count the merchandising, If we assume that on average each customer spends 10 dollars on merchandise that's an additional $15,000 coming in. $53,500. Pre show meet and greets can do some business as well especially if you have a big name star like Jericho in it. 

Without outlaying everything I could see AEW making 30-40 thousand on each house show assuming they ran areas where they could draw 1500. Run 3-6 of those a month and take the product to areas where AEW has a large fan base and you have a winning formula. Instead, I read today that Cody is planning to take AEW to the UK which is absolutely asinine since he hasn't even made all the money he can off the USA market yet.


----------



## RainmakerV2 (Nov 8, 2017)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> Ok, in all seriousness, what I think AEW needs more than anything else is more in-ring time for their talent, especially the newer people. Every week that goes by it becomes more and more obvious that most of them are simply not as comfortable as they need to be with whoever they’re in the ring with. So many of them have these really slick move sets, but they lack the experience to know how to put together truly great matches. That’s why things look forced and blatantly set-up. That means knowing when to go 20 minutes vs 5 or less; how to pace a match; how to smoothly transition from move to move, hold to hold, spot to spot, offense to selling. That means practice time, strong coaching from real seasoned ring veterans, and much more actual performance time than what they get from one tv show a week. Fix stuff like this, and I think it will make up for many of the other weaknesses. As I’ve said in a few other threads, there’s so much more to putting on a good show than throwing out a bunch of slick spots.
> 
> THAT DOESN’T MEAN GET RID OF THE SPOT-FESTS AND FILL THE TIME WITH FUCKING PROMOS; it means a lot of their talent need to get back to wrestling fundamentals and learn how to build good matches. First and foremost. That’s missing with at least 3/4 of the roster, and it makes all the other faults just stand out even more. More experienced guys in the locker room would also help a lot with correcting this.



Longer matches with people the general public doesn't know is the exact opposite of what they need right now. Sweet fucking Jesus.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Reggie Dunlop said:


> I honestly think Omega is just trying too hard to not hog the spotlight in order to give the newer guys a chance to rise.


It's catch 22, book himself strong and be told he is booked that way because he is booking himself, or book himself weak and not get over as a big star with the american audience.


----------



## NondescriptWWEfan (May 9, 2017)

a lot of filler tag matches


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

reyfan said:


> It's catch 22, book himself strong and be told he is booked that way because he is booking himself, or book himself weak and not get over as a big star with the american audience.


Nobody had issue with Cody booking himself as top baby or first challenger for title. In fact vocal hardcore fanbase seemed to embrace it. Cody wasn't iwgp champion or multiple time Tokyo Dome maineventer either so was coming in a lesser star.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

validreasoning said:


> Nobody had issue with Cody booking himself as top baby or first challenger for title. In fact vocal hardcore fanbase seemed to embrace it. Cody wasn't iwgp champion or multiple time Tokyo Dome maineventer either so was coming in a lesser star.


Yes but was that because the fans felt Cody was under appreciated in his run in WWE? Unless you watched NJPW Omega is fairly new to a U.S crowd.


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

reyfan said:


> Yes but was that because the fans felt Cody was under appreciated in his run in WWE? Unless you watched NJPW Omega is fairly new to a U.S crowd.


Don't think you needed to watch NJPW though. Everyone online was talking about Omega for 2 years. He was easily hottest act outside WWE and at points getting more Google searched than John Cena (Meltzer was claiming he was bigger draw at one point).

WWE booked Styles as strong as they did in year one because of New Japan run not TNA one and Omega was far far bigger star in Japan than Styles


----------



## Natecore (Sep 16, 2013)

The only thing I’d want changed is I miss those killer trios matches the Bucks always had. Something akin to the All In main event or a ton of their PWG/ROH matches. 10 minutes of an all out spring doing every move in every wrestler’s repertoire. It’s the one type of match nobody is doing in the world and it’s whats going to make AEW stand out.


----------



## lolomanolo (Nov 27, 2006)

I feel The Elite guys have been too selfless. They are the STARS along with Jericho and Mox and they need to make sure new viewers know that. Nobodies can’t give other nobodies the rub. They need to elevate themselves in the eyes of viewers who aren’t familiar with them before they can put others over.

They also need to strengthen their mid-card, more legit guys who can believably compete with their top stars. Preferably big men since that’s where they are lacking. Kenny Omega should not be struggling to beat a guy like Joey Janela. Have him getting manhandled by someone like Davey Boy Jr.. He takes his beating, then hits the V-Trigger outta nowhere and wins. Davey looks like a beast. Omega proves he can overcome the odds and win at anytime with his finish.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

The constant no selling of big moves and finishers is destroying them. The amount of matches where they should have ended only for a kickout at 2 is baffling and you can see the fans in the audience aren't amused by it.

Also I haven't seen the BTE series for quite a few weeks and feel as though I'm missing out on half the story lines, why isn't this incorporated in to the main programme instead of a YT show.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

the_flock said:


> The constant no selling of big moves and* finishers is destroying them. The amount of matches where they should have ended only for a kickout at 2 is baffling and you can see the fans in the audience aren't amused by it.*
> 
> Also I haven't seen the BTE series for quite a few weeks and feel as though I'm missing out on half the story lines, why isn't this incorporated in to the main programme instead of a YT show.


Only 1 guy kicked out of a finisher, it was Jericho against Cody
The fans in the audience are so unhappy about this that they're hot for every shows and during all the shows….


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Chan Hung said:


> I guess the Honey moon phase of AEW is running its course. Its now time for them to switch it up on New Years and get things going. Hopefully this short time away gives them time to rethink some things.


It absolutely is ending/already over, and that freshness factor wearing off is something they should have anticipated. You can only be new for so long. At a certain level, you can only be the “other” for so long. They are going to need to be good at some point, and the truth is that it is debatable whether there is evidence to suggest they can be. They have only succeeded to a niche as niche. They are being watched every week now.

And, in my opinion anyway, this explains the DVR numbers. People want to skim through the shit in the “buffet” to get to the good. They need to be good to get people to watch live. It’s really that



reyfan said:


> It's catch 22, book himself strong and be told he is booked that way because he is booking himself, or book himself weak and not get over as a big star with the american audience.


If you’re good in the role, no one is going to ask any questions. I’m not an Omega fan, but it is deluded to think his star was as big as this philosophy seems to be banking on. It’s ironically egocent



lolomanolo said:


> I feel The Elite guys have been too selfless. They are the STARS along with Jericho and Mox and they need to make sure new viewers know that. Nobodies can’t give other nobodies the rub. They need to elevate themselves in the eyes of viewers who aren’t familiar with them before they can put others over.
> 
> They also need to strengthen their mid-card, more legit guys who can believably compete with their top stars. Preferably big men since that’s where they are lacking. Kenny Omega should not be struggling to beat a guy like Joey Janela. Have him getting manhandled by someone like Davey Boy Jr.. He takes his beating, then hits the V-Trigger outta nowhere and wins. Davey looks like a beast. Omega proves he can overcome the odds and win at anytime with his finish.


They’re not selfless. The show is pumped full of their vanity. They do the shit they want to do. They have no problem undercutting the reality of a business that runs on credibility so they can get laughs. The whole “they are selfless” mentality really doesn’t work. If they were selfless, they’d have accepted that wrestling is a profession many lied to their own goddamn families to protect so they could have even preliminary level jobs. They’ve blown that all up for their fun in the sun.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

You know its bad when Jericho holds crisis meetings to explain to the tag teams that they actually have to make tags and Jr telling them to cut out all the flip flopping.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

the_flock said:


> You know its bad when Jericho holds crisis meetings to explain to the tag teams that they actually have to make tags and Jr telling them to cut out all the flip flopping.


Wait where did this happen?


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

reyfan said:


> Wait where did this happen?


On Konnan’s podcast.



the_flock said:


> You know its bad when Jericho holds crisis meetings to explain to the tag teams that they actually have to make tags and Jr telling them to cut out all the flip flopping.


I used to think Jericho was going to be “all in” with this promotion, but I’m starting to get the feeling of cracks emerging. It will be VERY interesting to see what happens at Wrestle Kingdom if Jericho loses to Tanahashi, and how that affects fan perception and fallout.

If the talent responds badly, turns in Jericho, etc., I can see Jericho walking. Maybe agreeing to drop the belt at Revolution and getting the hell out of dodge. I can see Gedo just completely outmaneuvering AEW.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

The Wood said:


> On Konnan’s podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah for sure. AEW is nearing its end.

I think Jericho will also cancel the AEW cruise in all honesty. He’s a lockerroom leader and I guess nobody has ever held meetings before like he did about the Lucha Bros.

AEW are in for dark times tbh.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

optikk sucks said:


> Yeah for sure. AEW is nearing its end.
> 
> I think Jericho will also cancel the AEW cruise in all honesty. He’s a lockerroom leader and I guess nobody has ever held meetings before like he did about the Lucha Bros.
> 
> AEW are in for dark times tbh.


Doubt it's near the end, hopefully them realising faults early leads to them making changes to steer the company in the right direction.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

optikk sucks said:


> Yeah for sure. AEW is nearing its end.
> 
> I think Jericho will also cancel the AEW cruise in all honesty. He’s a lockerroom leader and I guess nobody has ever held meetings before like he did about the Lucha Bros.
> 
> AEW are in for dark times tbh.


You said it bro

dark times bro

young fucks are killing the business


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

reyfan said:


> Doubt it's near the end, hopefully them realising faults early leads to them making changes to steer the company in the right direction.


What can they do though?


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

reyfan said:


> Doubt it's near the end, hopefully them realising faults early leads to them making changes to steer the company in the right direction.


Don’t u get it bro? They are nearing the end. They have lost over 80% of their original fan base - they don’t sell out shows, they are not retaining viewers, they aren’t selling merch, they are pushing Guys like Sonny Kiss heavily. Jericho aka locker room leader held a meeting with the Lucha Bros. That will probably push him away and AEW will be left with nothing. The product is run by wrestlers aka marks. I predict the end of AEW by the end of the year.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> Don’t u get it bro? They are nearing the end. They have lost over 80% of their original fan base - they don’t sell out shows, they are not retaining viewers, they aren’t selling merch, they are pushing Guys like Sonny Kiss heavily. Jericho aka locker room leader held a meeting with the Lucha Bros. That will probably push him away and AEW will be left with nothing. The product is run by wrestlers aka marks. I predict the end of AEW by the end of the year.


It's sad that someone took it seriously. ?


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> It's sad that someone took it seriously. ?


took what seriously? AEW are full of gymnasts; Hager, Ambrose etc are jobbing out to them. These small geeks are beating the likes of Hager cleanly in the ring bro. Forget about Richocet, Cedric etc beating the likes of Drew McIntyre or Cesaro.

bro! fucking Jake Hager is a jobber!


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> took what seriously? AEW are full of gymnasts; Hager, Ambrose etc are jobbing out to them. These small geeks are beating the likes of Hager cleanly in the ring bro. Forget about Richocet, Cedric etc beating the likes of Drew McIntyre or Cesaro.
> 
> bro! fucking Jake Hager is a jobber!


You just opened my eyes.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Tony Khan the mark millionaire is like wasting all his $$$ bro

Yung Fucks sucking him dry

hager super jobberz


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

No meme/viral creators outside of Jericho (And Orange Cassidy a bit). This is the world we live in now. Tik Tok mini vids. I remember hearing how great Eli Drake was back in his PC days and how he'd come up with things in promo classes and even just in regular conversation that would have the rest of the boys and girls quoting. They need some larger than life mic worker types, some sizzle to their steak roster. 

The attempted SCU singalong is so forced. 

Drake and nZo would help here. Guys who can generate interest with their mouths. Much like Jericho you put a mic on them and follow them around and they'll say something witty/funny that could catch on as a thing. 

People love seeing the mouthy heel shit talker getting their comeuppance as well. And nothing garners more heat than that same heel winning.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> No meme/viral creators outside of Jericho (And Orange Cassidy a bit). This is the world we live in now. Tik Tok mini vids. I remember hearing how great Eli Drake was back in his PC days and how he'd come up with things in promo classes and even just in regular conversation that would have the rest of the boys and girls quoting. They need some larger than life mic worker types, some sizzle to their steak roster.
> 
> The attempted SCU singalong is so forced.
> 
> ...


would you accept enzo amore


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

optikk sucks said:


> would you accept enzo amore


Hell yeah. 

AEW have messed up not getting CM Punk, Nzo, Big Cass, Eli Drake and Aron Stevens. Guys with charisma.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

the_flock said:


> Hell yeah.
> 
> AEW have messed up not getting *CM Punk*, Nzo, Big Cass, Eli Drake and Aron Stevens. Guys with charisma.


The guy didn't want to come, end of the story.


----------



## LongPig666 (Mar 27, 2019)

Thread title on where AEW is supposedly going wrong. 

Some WF posters: "Let's bring in Enzo Amore". 

Jesus fucking H fucking Christ ?


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

The Wood said:


> And, in my opinion anyway, this explains the DVR numbers. People want to skim through the shit in the “buffet” to get to the good. They need to be good to get people to watch live. It’s really that


I wonder if they did some sort of "live" interactive thing with fans having to do with matches etc that would help? I doubt it but hey lol


----------



## Prosper (Mar 25, 2015)

My take:

1.) Kenny needs to get his head out his ass. The thing people seem to forget about Kenny Omega is that this is his choice. He CHOOSES to give away his time to the women. He's a top executive like Cody and he books himself. I think his selflessness is hurting his star power.

2.) Top stars need to be featured every week. But this point has been made multiple times in this thread. The show needs to be centered around the main event stars for a while. They are giving too much time to people that no one really cares about in the long run. Not saying that the undercard shouldn't be pushed, of course they should be, but I think they need potent star power to dominate their shows right now. Calm down on trying to make everyone a star for a little bit and give us more Omega, Mox, PAC, Cody, MJF, Darby Allin, Luchasaurus and Jericho. The people who are the most over. Enough with the shitty women's wrestling and the Dark Order garbage. Enough of the comedic gimmick undercard shit. Just give us some badass main event level shit. Its only a 2 hour show and they're trying to do too much. I say until Revolution, keep the show focused, then they can move into pushing the undercard again. Restart Cody vs MJF. They need to build more of a foundation before pushing all the lower tier talent so hard.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

prosperwithdeen said:


> My take:
> 
> 1.) Kenny needs to get his head out his ass. The thing people seem to forget about Kenny Omega is that this is his choice. He CHOOSES to give away his time to the women. He's a top executive like Cody and he books himself. I think his selflessness is hurting his star power.
> 
> 2.) Top stars need to be featured every week. But this point has been made multiple times in this thread. The show needs to be centered around the main event stars for a while. They are giving too much time to people that no one really cares about in the long run. Not saying that the undercard shouldn't be pushed, of course they should be, but I think they need potent star power to dominate their shows right now. Calm down on trying to make everyone a star for a little bit and give us more Omega, Mox, PAC, Cody, MJF, Darby Allin, Luchasaurus and Jericho. The people who are the most over. Enough with the shitty women's wrestling and the Dark Order garbage. Enough of the comedic gimmick undercard shit. Just give us some badass main event level shit. Its only a 2 hour show and they're trying to do too much. I say until Revolution, keep the show focused, then they can move into pushing the undercard again. Restart Cody vs MJF. They need to build more of a foundation before pushing all the lower tier talent so hard.



Its funny cus all the people calling the shows are trying so hard to be careful to not looked over booked.Fuck tha these dudes need to all be in a heel stable. I think they all are better off being bad asses instead of being boring faces and being careful. Its not working. Imagine legit Cody,Bucks,Kenny and Page all Heel Elite.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

optikk sucks said:


> Don’t u get it bro? They are nearing the end. They have lost over 80% of their original fan base - they don’t sell out shows, they are not retaining viewers, they aren’t selling merch, they are pushing Guys like Sonny Kiss heavily. Jericho aka locker room leader held a meeting with the Lucha Bros. That will probably push him away and AEW will be left with nothing. The product is run by wrestlers aka marks. I predict the end of AEW by the end of the year.


I couldn’t love this any more.


----------



## The Raw Smackdown (Jan 8, 2017)

I don't think they're doing much wrong honestly. One thing I would say is the women's division really needs to get going. This Brandi/Kong thing is a step in the right direction but it needs more. 

Also they need to be more consistent with them showcasing people. I mean Darby Allen had that match with Jericho and it seems like he either hasn't been at all or rarely on the show since. Same with this Cody/MJF feud. I mean they start it but then put it on the backburner. If they were gonna do that then they should've done it at a later time. 

Other than that it's fine to me.


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

prosperwithdeen said:


> My take:
> 
> 1.) Kenny needs to get his head out his ass. The thing people seem to forget about Kenny Omega is that this is his choice. He CHOOSES to give away his time to the women. He's a top executive like Cody and he books himself. I think his selflessness is hurting his star power.
> 
> 2.) Top stars need to be featured every week. But this point has been made multiple times in this thread. The show needs to be centered around the main event stars for a while. They are giving too much time to people that no one really cares about in the long run. Not saying that the undercard shouldn't be pushed, of course they should be, but I think they need potent star power to dominate their shows right now. Calm down on trying to make everyone a star for a little bit and give us more Omega, Mox, PAC, Cody, MJF, Darby Allin, Luchasaurus and Jericho. The people who are the most over. Enough with the shitty women's wrestling and the Dark Order garbage. Enough of the comedic gimmick undercard shit. Just give us some badass main event level shit. Its only a 2 hour show and they're trying to do too much. I say until Revolution, keep the show focused, then they can move into pushing the undercard again. Restart Cody vs MJF. They need to build more of a foundation before pushing all the lower tier talent so hard.


Pretty much. Outside of a small hardcore group, no one in the US knows who Kenny Omega is. If they want to actually build an audience, they need to showcase and build stars. Him losing most of his matches makes him look like the 50/50 WWE guys of the past ten years.


----------



## Hangman (Feb 3, 2017)

As my old mam used to say, too many chiefs and not enough indians. 

You need one Booker to call the shots.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

optikk sucks said:


> took what seriously? AEW are full of gymnasts; Hager, Ambrose etc are jobbing out to them. These small geeks are beating the likes of Hager cleanly in the ring bro. Forget about Richocet, Cedric etc beating the likes of Drew McIntyre or Cesaro.
> 
> bro! fucking Jake Hager is a jobber!


Lol I know McIntyre, Cesaro are former ECW champ, MITB winner and World Champion. Unlike that jobber Hager... Oh wait... Well at least McIntyre, Cesaro and Ricochet were IC or US champions unlike that jobber Hager. Oh wait....


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

optikk sucks said:


> Don’t u get it bro? They are nearing the end. They have lost over 80% of their original fan base - they don’t sell out shows, they are not retaining viewers, they aren’t selling merch, they are pushing Guys like Sonny Kiss heavily. Jericho aka locker room leader held a meeting with the Lucha Bros. That will probably push him away and AEW will be left with nothing. The product is run by wrestlers aka marks. I predict the end of AEW by the end of the year.


I get this is an attempt at sarcasm, but you should probably not make such a good case for this shit going off the rails.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

The Wood said:


> I get this is an attempt at sarcasm, but you should probably not make such a good case for this shit going off the rails.


? no sarcasm

honestly I don’t like the way AEW is going. I agree with you mostly.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

It does seem to be turning more and more people off. It wouldn’t surprise me if the drop gets steeper when NXT and WWE roll into WrestleMania season (especially if their Mania programs, while probably poorly executed, are big programs).

Like, this rumored Edge return. I don’t even know who I’d like to see paired with, and I was never a massive fan. But it’s absolutely surreal. What if Punk comes back? John Morrison is always fantastic. We could be looking at World Title matches built around Brock Lesnar, Samoa Joe, Daniel Bryan and someone else. Or maybe not. Could also be cold as fuck. But I think the priorities of the story might knock AEW down with fans even if their programming is good.


----------



## The Golden Shovel (Jan 19, 2017)

DOTL said:


> What's circular about saying burying an angle live on air makes people less interested in the product? What's circular about saying JR's approach is indeed burying certain aspects of the show? What's circular about saying that if JR had the same approach with WWE gimmicks the like Undertaker and Kane, he'd undermine a good thing? Sounds like you're attempting to bring in logic based buzzwords to hide the simple fact that your argument lacks any consistency and ultimately makes no rational sense.
> 
> Do yourself a favor. Imagine this shoot style of commentary on a show you actually wanted to be succeed. AE WWF perhaps(if you were even alive then). Do you think WWF would have done well if their top commentator was constantly burying all the stupid crap( and there was *a lot *of stupid crap during that time) that he saw in the ring, killing kayfabe in the process? If you say that would be okay, then you're either being dishonest or YOU are the one who doesn't know the terms you're talking about.
> 
> ...


JR looked out of place guest commenting at Takeovers in 2017 so I'm not really sure why there was such an expectation that would change with another group of wrestlers he seemed out of the loop on in AEW.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> What's circular about saying burying an angle live on air makes people less interested in the product? What's circular about saying JR's approach is indeed burying certain aspects of the show? What's circular about saying that if JR had the same approach with WWE gimmicks the like Undertaker and Kane, he'd undermine a good thing? Sounds like you're attempting to bring in logic based buzzwords to hide the simple fact that your argument lacks any consistency and ultimately makes no rational sense.


Because I've explained it to you: The potential audience giving this shit a chance needs to have their emotions understood and catered to by a representative on the program. It's that simple. If punches are clearly missing in an extended shot, an announcer saying "Oh my god! Look at those shots barrelling down!" is what _actually_ buries you. People don't understand what burying means. It means when you get so far under instead of over you've got no chance to make money. JR _knows_ this. It's not his opinion. It's his experience as a fucking god at what he does. That's why he was one of the first names leaked for this fucking thing. 

JR supports the program by being there, showing up, and calling the good shit like it matters. He needs credibility to do that. If he called Riho like a serious bad-ass, that credibility would be gone, because people can visibly see that she's not -- _something you actually pointed out without realizing that *that* is the burial._

Sounds like you can't fucking read or comprehend what I'm saying. The Undertaker and Kane having a fucking hoss fight is not the same thing as The Dark Order and Riho. I'm sure he did call shit on Kane's stuff (I can't remember the exact segment, but the comedy they had Kane doing with The Stooges comes to mind). JR also infamously made a snide call when Taker killed X-Pac's momentum when Pac was getting pretty fucking over. Something about "literally burying his career right now." Taker and Kane, though, for as limited as they could be in the ring at the time, was a fucking hoss fight and a well-built up and effective story using a top guy that had been around and actually drawn money at some point. They're totally different things. 



DOTL said:


> Do yourself a favor. Imagine this shoot style of commentary on a show you actually wanted to be succeed. AE WWF perhaps(if you were even alive then). Do you think WWF would have done well if their top commentator was constantly burying all the stupid crap( and there was *a lot *of stupid crap during that time) that he saw in the ring, killing kayfabe in the process? If you say that would be okay, then you're either being dishonest or YOU are the one who doesn't know the terms you're talking about.


I want AEW to succeed. So does JR. He likes those cheques coming in. That's why he calls the shit the shit. And yes, JR *did* bury the stupid crap. That's a large part of the reason he had so much heat with Russo. JR is not the one killing kayfabe when he calls it. The kayfabe is dead when the work isn't working. *That's why they call it a work.*



DOTL said:


> This isn't an issue of what fans don't want to be told. It's an issue of what fans don't need to hear. JR down right denigrating the product on air doesn't draw. Period. No one but the smarkiest smarks are watching the show because JR is lampshading stuff they might not have noticed otherwise. No one is watching the show because of JR's audible eye-rolling and innuendo. JR's opinion isn't getting anything over. His selling the show is what got him and his shows over. Most people didn't even know JR's shoot opinion on things until YouTube and podcasts.
> 
> And I'm not saying he has to sell all the crap. But he doesn't need to bury the show in commentary either.


Fans don't need to be seeing the shit JR has to call. How do you not get that? JR draws because of his credibility. Holy fuck, we're back here again. People aren't going to watch the show _because_ JR is shitting on it. You've made that up. I'm saying there is less chance of them running away because he can empathize with their perspective. JR's opinion probably matters to a lot more people than a lot of these wrestlers do in total, at the moment. And they do themselves no favors by not factoring it in whilst paying him that huge amount of money for his expertise, 

JR wouldn't denigrate the program if it weren't visibly bad. He's using his eyes to watch it, and when he sees something that makes him go"Whoa-oh," he calls it, because he knows what the viewer can see at home. It's that simple. 



DOTL said:


> You make the mistake of assuming that being honest and being unprofessional are mutually exclusive. Well, pointing to a lack of a crowd would be calling a spade a spade too. Why bother making a distinction between that and constantly burying one of your few on air draws in Rhio if both have the same negative effect?


You are making the mistake of thinking that when I'm talking about being honest about things you can see, you think I mean being honest about things you can't. Lying to fans and saying that you are sold out when there are clearly empty seats _visible on camera_ is a mistake. So don't show the empty seats. If you don't want a tiny girl's feather-like offense being called like that, don't show it. Unprofessional would be getting a good wrestler and then saying it was all smoke and mirrors, folks. But there's no smoke or mirror to this, so you've got to call the bare bones. You have to. It's what the viewer is being presented. 



DOTL said:


> If JR's job is to help AEW, then it means that his job is to increase the number of eyes on the show. When he's on TV, it involves a completely different strategy than when he's backstage. This is common sense.
> .
> Simply put, commentary isn't the time or place to air your shoot grievances. That crap wouldn't fly in WWE, and you know it.


JR isn't the issue with AEW not getting eyeballs, friend, lol. When he's on TV, he still does his job splendidly and does his best to keep things on track. If there's no track he can't not call a train-wreck. That AEW is a train-wreck is the responsibility of other people. 

And JR used to do it all the time in WWE. And you know that, or you just weren't paying attention.


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

You know, ENZO would be a major heat magnet. He can talk. Yeah he puts foot in mouth too much, but for a fun short trainwreck he could be entertaining .


----------



## The Swerve (Jan 29, 2019)

I’m still really behind them, want them to succeed, and will keep watching, but I’m struggling with the comedy stuff, the over the top gimmicks and the crazy kick outs (NXT, which I also love, suffers from this too a bit). 

I know that the over the top gimmicks is what pro wrestling is for some people, but I hoped AEW would sort of sit somewhere between WWE and NJPW in style, but it’s a LONG way from the NJPW style at the moment.

I’ll stick with it and give it some time to figure out what it wants to be.


----------



## The Swerve (Jan 29, 2019)

I also think the EVP positions have caused them major booking issues. They’d have been better off having Khan announce the company and then announce them as signed wrestlers. He could still have paid them the same and behind the scenes they could’ve been EVPs but by making them front and centre as running the company they’ve basically hamstrung themselves booking wise.

I appreciate they wanted to capitalise on Being the Elite and All In but the people watching those would’ve watched without it having to be called all elite wrestling.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

The Wood said:


> Because I've explained it to you: The potential audience giving this shit a chance needs to have their emotions understood and catered to by a representative on the program. It's that simple. If punches are clearly missing in an extended shot, an announcer saying "Oh my god! Look at those shots barrelling down!" is what _actually_ buries you. People don't understand what burying means. It means when you get so far under instead of over you've got no chance to make money. JR _knows_ this. It's not his opinion. It's his experience as a fucking god at what he does. That's why he was one of the first names leaked for this fucking thing.
> 
> JR supports the program by being there, showing up, and calling the good shit like it matters. He needs credibility to do that. If he called Riho like a serious bad-ass, that credibility would be gone, because people can visibly see that she's not -- _something you actually pointed out without realizing that *that* is the burial._
> 
> ...


Man what a fantastic and well thought out essay


----------



## Joe Gill (Jun 29, 2019)

1. Ditch Excalibur he does nothing to help talent get over and he is boring as hell. Replace him with a funny heel color commentator like bobby hennan or jerry lawler back in the 90s.

2. Too many damn tag matches. More singles matches. Casual fans dont give a shit about tag team title.

3. Jericho, Moxley and MJF should be on tv every week and the focus of the show

4. Maximum of one random flippy midget match per week 

5. Ditch all the whacky gimmicks they have all been cringe so far

6. Omega better go on a major winning streak in the new year once the records reset... if he is still losing random matches they just killed the career of the most talented wrestler on the roster

7. Keep the womans matches real short until you can sign some actual talent like tessa blanchard

8. Stop pandering to the indy marks at the shows who cheer for the lamest shit like ballet goofy humor


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

nZo is twitter beefing with Tama Tonga - probably ruins any chance he might have had getting signed by AEW.

On a different side, it seems like AEW is back to pushing the Lucha Brothers after jobbing them to Best Friends. Penta/Fenix beat Hangman/Omega last week, booked for a six man with PAC against Bucks and Omega at Jan 1st Homecoming show and then already announced against Cody/Dustin for Jan 8th Dynamite.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> nZo is twitter beefing with Tama Tonga - probably ruins any chance he might have had getting signed by AEW.
> 
> On a different side, it seems like AEW is back to pushing the Lucha Brothers after jobbing them to Best Friends. Penta/Fenix beat Hangman/Omega last week, booked for a six man with PAC against Bucks and Omega at Jan 1st Homecoming show and then already announced against Cody/Dustin for Jan 8th Dynamite.



Lucha bros should have been booked consistently as the modt dominating tag team. In fact no one has been which is stupid


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

shandcraig said:


> Lucha bros should have been booked consistently as the modt dominating tag team. In fact no one has been which is stupid


Anyone losing to the best friends is a travesty, but the way they have booked the Lucha Bros. has been beyond horrible.


----------



## Gh0stFace (Oct 10, 2019)

Trent is very underrated. IDK about Chuck Taylor haven't seen much of him


----------



## yeahright2 (Feb 11, 2011)

The Swerve said:


> I also think the EVP positions have caused them major booking issues. They’d have been better off having Khan announce the company and then announce them as signed wrestlers. He could still have paid them the same and behind the scenes they could’ve been EVPs but by making them front and centre as running the company they’ve basically hamstrung themselves booking wise.
> 
> I appreciate they wanted to capitalise on Being the Elite and All In but the people watching those would’ve watched without it having to be called all elite wrestling.


Nope. The last thing they need is some underhanded tactics where some people are hired secretly - Just look how well that worked for Impact when they had secretly hired Russo. Things need to be out in the open -Being the son of Dusty doesn´t help Cody in exactly THIS situation where he´s both an EVP and a wrestler. So if Cody and friends wants to play EVPs, then they shouldn´t be wrestling unless it was made certain to everyone that they didn´t have any booking power at all. And that´s not realistic yet (they´re still young). AEW is a case of someone trying both to have the pie and eat it at the same time. -Just look at Brandi, the only reason why she´s in the position she is is because she´s married to Cody.

And despite what this post might look like, I want AEW to succeed, variation is always good


----------



## Sir Linko (Oct 10, 2019)

Their singles division is right where it needs to be and is doing great IMO.

Giving the Womens Championship to Riho who is currently working a Lesnar Schedule was a really bad move considering the early push for being the alternative to WWE and doing things "right".

The Tag Division looked to be Lucha Bros but I think they called an audible and named SCU Champs and I think that was a pretty meh move.

Otherwise they had one of two things they had to do. Either bury all talent so that The Elite + Mox and Jericho were all trying their hardest to carry the promotion. Or try to make stars for 11 weeks as often as possible. So far they're achieving for the most part in MJF, Darby, Scorpio Sky (singles run), Best Friends, Dark Order (vignettes), OC. It hasn't been perfect but they've had Jericho / Mox rub off on people.

Now we're starting to get into the meat of AEW. Mox vs Jericho, MJF vs Cody (eventually Jericho or Mox), Bucks finally in the title picture, Lucha Bros now starting to win, Womens division finally rolling, Jake Hager vs Luchasauras, Dark Order (even though that segment wasn't great), ect....


I'm going to keep watching AEW because I love it personally. AFter the first 6 weeks or so being complete banger after banger they were bound to have solid, but not complete fire, shows. Hits and misses, but 2020 is where AEW sinks or swim, especially early. Grab your butts


EDIT: Oh but something that has been pissing me off that I just got reminded of. Is something they're botching badly is doing segments during commercials. Not everyone has FITE T.V. and not everyone watches on TNT. So you have part of the audience hearing the segments on FITE T.V., part of the audience only being able to see segments on TNT T.V., and part of the audience not having either on the TNT T.V. website. Then you have story building on BTE / Social Media and don't mention either of those platforms meaningfully enough to actually have people actually remember to watch. Then you have holes in all of your plots.

Like I knew Page was turning on The Elite from BTE before many others knew seeing it on T.V.. Luckily they're playing it out well on T.V.

But last week I didn't see Kenny Omega getting attacked backstage after chasing Pac because IT HAPPENED DURING COMMERCIAL. I heard about that shit from Bryan Alvarez because he was also pissed off about it. Someone texted him the segment. Stop doing that shit AEW.


----------



## The_Workout_Buddy (Jan 11, 2014)

Like every wrestling show has its ups and downs but there are 2 things they need to change to improve their television product:

- The bad habit of ASSUMING that everyone who watches Dynamite it's an avid viewer of BTE youtube channel.

- Not introducing the characters (gimmick, motives, goals) prior to their in-ring debut, big flaw considering that most of the roster has never been on a major television show prior to AEW Dynamite.

In the first weeks, specially the ones leading to the Jericho/Rhodes encounter they produce some of the best video packages we have seen on a wrestling show for years, the bad thing is that those were made only for the talent that least needed it.

Adam Page, MJF, Darby Allen, The Lucha Bros, Kenny Omega - they are the ones to whom the production should devote all possible resources to increase their value in the eyes of the public who does not know their past. 

If I have never seen one of these talents before why should I care about them judging by their presentation since Dynamite debut?

That is an issue that the company can easily solve and in a short time, I'm not talking about a 20 minutes promo every week I'm talking about a less than 3 minutes video package every week hyping the character of one of the acts of the roster, 

I mean Riho has been the women champion since the first show but until now we don't know WHO IS SHE....


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

Marbar said:


> The dark order vignettes were intriguing but the dark order is a complete mess (even worse than brandy). AEW need to push stars with charisma that are going to draw viewers. They have a strong core of wrestlers which are not being utilized so they can give tv time to garbage acts. Shorten some of the matches, get rid of 90% of the flippy shit, give us some old school grapplers and ditch multiple kick outs in every match. Entertain me like you did for the first few episodes. To be quite honest I'm starting to lose interest in what I thought could be wrestlings saving grace. I stopped watching wrestling when Vince created his monopoly because it became redundit as hell. The elite really need to get their shit together or the bleeding will continue. Dump the garbage and focus on what will attract viewers.


Exactly


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

lolomanolo said:


> I feel The Elite guys have been too selfless. They are the STARS along with Jericho and Mox and they need to make sure new viewers know that. Nobodies can’t give other nobodies the rub. They need to elevate themselves in the eyes of viewers who aren’t familiar with them before they can put others over.
> 
> They also need to strengthen their mid-card, more legit guys who can believably compete with their top stars. Preferably big men since that’s where they are lacking. Kenny Omega should not be struggling to beat a guy like Joey Janela. Have him getting manhandled by someone like Davey Boy Jr.. He takes his beating, then hits the V-Trigger outta nowhere and wins. Davey looks like a beast. Omega proves he can overcome the odds and win at anytime with his finish.


Davey Boy Smith Jr. Another guy they could have signed but inept management wanted to sign their friends and indyriffic guys with a small niche following because they were getting YouTube hits.


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

the_flock said:


> The constant no selling of big moves and finishers is destroying them. The amount of matches where they should have ended only for a kickout at 2 is baffling and you can see the fans in the audience aren't amused by it.
> 
> Also I haven't seen the BTE series for quite a few weeks and feel as though I'm missing out on half the story lines, why isn't this incorporated in to the main programme instead of a YT show.


Said that from the private party shooting star press that should have put away the young bucks in EP. #2. Then all the offense and kickouts of Marko Stunt who should NEVER look strong against a guy like Pentagon who lucha underground established as a killer on US television.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Dondada78 said:


> Davey Boy Smith Jr. Another guy they could have signed but inept management wanted to sign their friends and indyriffic guys with a small niche following because they were getting YouTube hits.


It's great to meet you Jim Cornette!

Hey Jim, are the Bucks Tag champs? Cody or Omega must be World champ right?

These inept guys just hire their friends. I'm so sick of seeing Brandon Cutler on Dynamite winning matches. Michael Nakawaza main event push has been pretty well done tho. I'm still in shock that Marko Stunt beat Moxley last week tho. But it's well deserved just like Sonny Kiss win over Jazz hands Kenny Olivier.

I'm so glad old man Jericho finally dropped the title to Joey Janela. I hope they book Jimmy Havoc vs Orange Cassidy in a mudshow outlaw wrestling match for number 1 contender. What a niche indyriff show this has become.


Wait so that was all just a dream? Brandon Cutler jobs and gets his ass kicked every week? Michael Nakazawa lost to Moxley in a minute and got dragged around like a loser by Pac last week? Marko Stunt? You mean that little manager guy who comes with Jungle Boy and Luchasurus. That only wrestled in one tag match on tv when Luchuaruas was hurt?


Sonny Kiss? That guy who's only been on Dynamite when they did the Battle Royal? Wait so Janela two matches on Dynamite have been loses to Omega and Moxley? I thought Jelly Janela was getting pushed WTF! At least Jimmy Havoc and Orange Cassidy must be wrestling all the time. Oh so Jimmy Havoc wrestled once on Dynamite besides Battle Royal and Orange Cassidy basically Best Friends manager?


I'll be honest, these guys don't sound like very good friends. My question for you though Jim. Is why do you want Davey Boy Smith in AEW over those guys. When it means he would be taking their places as jobbers or guys who don't wrestle on tv? Or would it be more inept to sign Smith instead of Brandon Cutler (and for more money) . So Smith could job and get his ass kicked every week?

I don't mean to pick on you. But it's silly to say they should have signed this guy or that guy. Hes better then(insert jobber name here)that guy. When AEW real show is built on Jericho(with Inner Circle), Moxley, Cody, Omega, Pac, Page, MJF and Darby Allin really. With mixing veterans like Dustin or Spears here and there. Along with Tag division of Young Bucks, SCU, Lucha Bros and Santana/Ortiz. So if you want certain guy over Moxley, Page, etc. Then that makes sense other wise it's adding depth to mid card.


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

Gh0stFace said:


> Trent is very underrated. IDK about Chuck Taylor haven't seen much of him


Chuck Taylor is the invisible hand grenade dude. He also has clearly never seen the inside of a gym. Trent needs to drop that tool and be a singles guy.


----------



## Algernon (Jul 27, 2006)

Sorry but Vince is right...TAG TEAM WRESTLING DOESNT DRAW. They have depth in the tag division but nowhere else. The biggest issues are depth and sustainability. Whats going to happen when Moxley,Jericho, Cody and MJF become stale and you have to reboot? Looking at it now, when Jericho goes on his inevitable sabbatical they have to hope MJF is ready to be the top heel or turn Cody, theres no other options. Omega feels like just another guy right now.

With a weekly TV show how do they save fresh matchups for PPV's? When you're comparing 10 dollars a month for WWE vs paying 50 dollars for a PPV, it matters more for AEW. Its really not an issue yet but it will be long term when the current top feuds run their course and they don't have the depth or star power to elevate somebody the fans will care about.


----------



## Supostcity (Aug 17, 2017)

AEW is trying to steal fans like me, people who like wrestling but are frustrated with the WWE. However we don't know much about Kenny Omega or the Young Bucks for example, so I tuned in to watch and yes I was impressed with some of the athleticism but they gave me no reason to care about the characters. If I wanted to watch no selling, no story telling, flips and flops I would watch gymnastics. Why is Marco stunt on my TV at all let alone standing in the ring with the world champion?!?! Can you imagine Marco stunt standing in the ring with the Fiend or Lesnar looking at them like he is going to kick their assess? They need to build some stars or steal some from the WWE, Jericho can't have that much time left and without he and Moxley on the show I sadly wouldn't care at all about it. This is coming from someone who was really excited about the promotion and wishing they could be successful.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Where are AEW going wrong?

For a little while they thought all fans’ voices mattered, and that all voices were fans

Now, i’m guessing they’ll adjust more based on crowd reactions and interactions with live fans

Which is correct

Like the dude above me ‘try to steal me, but change just about everything that made you popular in the first place’

Pffffft


----------



## kingfrass44 (Sep 19, 2019)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Where are AEW going wrong?
> 
> For a little while they thought all fans’ voices mattered, and that all voices were fans
> 
> ...


They were not popular in the first place
Chris Jericho and Jon Moxley and made Some popular
They are just a honeymoon and it is over


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

kingfrass44 said:


> That did not make it made you popular in the first place
> Chris Jericho and Jon Moxley and made you popular in the first place


........ please

Most of us have been following them since NJPW and ROH days - as well as BTE

The Elite have been drawing big numbers - but I guess you forgot All In + all that went before and came after

Jog on


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

imthegame19 said:


> It's great to meet you Jim Cornette!
> 
> Hey Jim, are the Bucks Tag champs? Cody or Omega must be World champ right?
> 
> ...


Lmao at this post! Dang near choked on my tea! I don't necessarily agree with what you said but wow you know how to sarcasm and satire!


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

BigCy said:


> Lmao at this post! Dang near choked on my tea! I don't necessarily agree with what you said but wow you know how to sarcasm and satire!


I'm glad I could entertain you. Sadly you would think a lot of that is true. Based off all the bashing and nitpicking people do with AEW. 

You rarely see people say Moxley sucks, Jericho sucks, Cody sucks, Pac sucks, Page sucks, MJF sucks and even Omega criticism is based on people knowing he can be so much better. Even most dirt sheet guys and such are fans of Darby Allin now. But most of criticism that AEW gets is based off guys who are jobbers, managers or not even used on tv. Which isn't AEW, the guys I listed above are.


Now I'm not saying they are perfect by any stretch. They need to figure out how to do good weekly t.v. when not building towards a ppv. The tag team division needs to be booked better as does the woman's(which has been much better the last month). But the top male singles talent and top tag team talent is very good. Yes they could use another big guy or two and deepen the roster. 


But all the complaining about hiring their friends or small indie guys is nonsense. Because those guys are either jobbers, managers or rarely used.


----------



## Supostcity (Aug 17, 2017)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Where are AEW going wrong?
> 
> For a little while they thought all fans’ voices mattered, and that all voices were fans
> 
> ...


So what is it you think made them popular in the first place?


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Supostcity said:


> So what is it you think made them popular in the first place?


BTE
Standing up against ‘the machine’ - seen in various BTE shows with the ‘invasion’ and pot shots
Highly athletic, spot based wrestling for the Bucks
Long, interwoven storylines which sometimes took 6months to a year to unfold
Kenny’s weird little quirks
Great matches that go the distance, trying to make yourself and your opponent look strong
Taking the piss when they think something is funny
Crazy 6 man tags
Direct fan interactions at shows, with merch, online
Not being afraid to do silly stuff
And now.... Cody’s character work wrestling


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

imthegame19 said:


> It's great to meet you Jim Cornette!
> 
> Hey Jim, are the Bucks Tag champs? Cody or Omega must be World champ right?
> 
> ...


Lol, you do a great job of demonstrating how pointless so much of this promotion is. You act like having such riff raff around is good. It’s still trash.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

imthegame19 said:


> It's great to meet you Jim Cornette!
> 
> Hey Jim, are the Bucks Tag champs? Cody or Omega must be World champ right?
> 
> ...


They DO hire their friends, what are you talking about? Brandon Cutler, Nakazawa and Stunt would never get jobs on the number 2 wrestling company in the United States if they didn't have friends running the creative. Nobody says those guys are being pushed but there is obviously much better enhancement talent out there yet they're being used.

Here is a fact for you. Michael Nakazawa speaks fluent English and was in charge of communicating with the foreign talents that went into DDT Japan. He would very likely have been responsible for Kenny Omega getting his first full time gig in Japan which lead to NJPW which lead to Omega becoming the star he is today. He also would've been a massive help for Omega who would've likely struggled to feel at home in Japan. Him being there is a reward for his loyalty and friendship over the past however many years.

Brandon Cutler used to be a regular Californian indy guy. Guess who made their names working Californian independents? The Young Bucks. A few others have obviously come from the Bucks and their PWG connection also.

Cody has hired his older brother and puts his wife on television regularly when you could really argue that Dustin would be best off working the indies and Brandi would be best working backstage. He also stated publicly that he believes in nepotism as have I believe The Bucks. They are openly admitting to hiring their friends based on nothing but friendship, why are you denying that?

You're being dishonest about Stunt. He has had tag matches on PPV and TV. Regardless it doesn't matter how many times it's happened he looks like a child and shouldn't be there. Nor should a lot of the AEW undercard. If guys do not look like they could kick someones ass they shouldn't really be there. It's that simple.

Again, you're twisting things in an attempt to keep your narrative going. Janela did lose to Moxley but it took Moxley almost ten minutes to put the comedy indy guy away. Spears was over 10, Omega was over 10 (They had a 26 minute match at one point also). Considering the guy doesn't resemble an athlete and looks more like someone you'd see behind the counter at a comic book store rather than a wrestler I'm sure he's very happy about all this TV time being given to him and him being a valid competition to the stars of AEW regardless of if he wins or loses.

I don't mean to pick on you but you're twisting things to suit your narrative and don't seem to know how a proper episodic wrestling show should work. Yes, the AEW show is built on Jericho, Moxley and the other guys you've listed but with such an awful midcard people are going to tune out before they can get to these stars. Are you a sports fan at all? Every team has it's star players but they also have toilers who work hard every week, are solid/good never worse never better and are consistent. AEW have hired their star players but are being let down by their toilers because they either don't have experience, cannot work a style that appeals to the mainstream public, aren't marketable or are there for reasons other than because they bring something to the show.

You take a big shit on Davey Boy Smith Jr but I think he's a fine suggestion as a lower midcard option. He's got 15 years experience in the top levels of wrestling (7 years NJPW, 2 years NOAH, 6 years WWE), looks like a wrestler, has a little bit of name value and has likely had thousands of matches. I'd much rather Davey Boy Smith Jr toiling away in the midcard as opposed to Joey Janela, Best Friends, Dark Order etc who don't have as much experience as Davey Jr combined.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

Chip Chipperson said:


> They DO hire their friends, what are you talking about? Brandon Cutler, Nakazawa and Stunt would never get jobs on the number 2 wrestling company in the United States if they didn't have friends running the creative. Nobody says those guys are being pushed but there is obviously much better enhancement talent out there yet they're being used.
> 
> Here is a fact for you. Michael Nakazawa speaks fluent English and was in charge of communicating with the foreign talents that went into DDT Japan. He would very likely have been responsible for Kenny Omega getting his first full time gig in Japan which lead to NJPW which lead to Omega becoming the star he is today. He also would've been a massive help for Omega who would've likely struggled to feel at home in Japan. Him being there is a reward for his loyalty and friendship over the past however many years.
> 
> ...


Fantastic read; exactly what we need on a forum. I agree with everything you said and yes i really did read this PHD-worthy essay.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

I think that they're also suffering from the fact that something looking great on paper is not necessarily going to look great on TV.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Chip Chipperson said:


> They DO hire their friends, what are you talking about? Brandon Cutler, Nakazawa and Stunt would never get jobs on the number 2 wrestling company in the United States if they didn't have friends running the creative. Nobody says those guys are being pushed but there is obviously much better enhancement talent out there yet they're being used.
> 
> Here is a fact for you. Michael Nakazawa speaks fluent English and was in charge of communicating with the foreign talents that went into DDT Japan. He would very likely have been responsible for Kenny Omega getting his first full time gig in Japan which lead to NJPW which lead to Omega becoming the star he is today. He also would've been a massive help for Omega who would've likely struggled to feel at home in Japan. Him being there is a reward for his loyalty and friendship over the past however many years.
> 
> ...


Next time you are gonna spend all this time writing all this. It should be about something that matters. Not enhancement talent, jobbers/Managers or complaining about preshow matches etc. Or how long a match went when the match was good lol. Not to mention every thing you mentioned is stuff we also see on number 1 wrestling company. Only they arent enhancement talent, jobbers and have been used on t.v. alot.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

The Wood said:


> Lol, you do a great job of demonstrating how pointless so much of this promotion is. You act like having such riff raff around is good. It’s still trash.


Yes because people really care who the enhancement talent is. While glorified managers that are over with crowd is such a big deal. I feel really good about how good AEW is doing. When nitpicking and bashing is over guys who barely even on tv. Haha.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl (Jan 30, 2016)

I've enjoyed every episode of AEW so far but producing good shows just isn't enough for a startup company that wants to present itself as an alternative in 2019 and heading into 2020. Maybe getting Punk was beyond their reach but they needed to do something to keep people talking. Jack Swagger being the surprise debut of their first episode was pretty deflating for example. They can talk all they want about how they just wanna do their own thing but the fact is a lot of the momentum is gone now and "their thing", while entertaining, isn't must-see TV if we're being honest. It's a lot better than Raw and Smackdown but those are established shows with built-in audiences and they can afford to coast for now. NXT upping their game lately hasn't helped them either. 

Tony should've gone after bigger names more aggressively imo. AJ and Sasha would've done wonders for their roster and both were more realistic than Punk in retrospect. A lot of the fault also goes to Meltzer who got everyone's hopes up by reporting about many top WWE stars wanting to jump ship ASAP. I've mentioned their underwhelming women's division many times but it's also relevant to this thread so I'll just leave it at that. The Kenny losing his mojo storyline could've worked if they had other stars to fall back on while they told this long-term redemption story but instead they've taken away the luster from one of their few stars and seem to be afraid of committing to the story now out of fear of ruining him completely. They're also relying on rematches a bit too much which isn't a good sign this early into the company's run but this is might just be a consequence of the weak roster at the moment. They can improve on all of these things over time but they really need to be proactive.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

BulletClubFangirl said:


> I've enjoyed every episode of AEW so far but producing good shows just isn't enough for a startup company that wants to present itself as an alternative in 2019 and heading into 2020. Maybe getting Punk was beyond their reach but they needed to do something to keep people talking. Jack Swagger being the surprise debut of their first episode was pretty deflating for example. They can talk all they want about how they just wanna do their own thing but the fact is a lot of the momentum is gone now and "their thing", while entertaining, isn't must-see TV if we're being honest. It's a lot better than Raw and Smackdown but those are established shows with built-in audiences and they can afford to coast for now. NXT upping their game lately hasn't helped them either.
> 
> Tony should've gone after bigger names more aggressively imo. *AJ and Sasha would've done wonders for their roster and both were more realistic than Punk in retrospect.* A lot of the fault also goes to Meltzer who got everyone's hopes up by reporting about many top WWE stars wanting to jump ship ASAP. I've mentioned their underwhelming women's division many times but it's also relevant to this thread so I'll just leave it at that. The Kenny losing his mojo storyline could've worked if they had other stars to fall back on while they told this long-term redemption story but instead they've taken away the luster from one of their few stars and seem to be afraid of committing to the story now out of fear of ruining him completely. They're also relying on rematches a bit too much which isn't a good sign this early into the company's run but this is might just be a consequence of the weak roster at the moment. They can improve on all of these things over time but they really need to be proactive.


They were under contract.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl (Jan 30, 2016)

rbl85 said:


> They were under contract.


When exactly? AJ's contract was coming up around Wrestlemania season and Sasha was sitting out, tweeting about being unhappy and flirting with AEW until she resigned with WWE as well. There were short windows of opportunity for both of them. Maybe AEW made an offer but I would've gone all out for both of them. It's not just exclusive to those two either. I think they need to be going after talent more aggressively in general. Their roster needs a shot in the arm.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

BulletClubFangirl said:


> When exactly? AJ's contract was coming up around Wrestlemania season and Sasha was sitting out, tweeting about being unhappy and flirting with AEW until she resigned with WWE as well. There were short windows of opportunity for both of them. Maybe AEW made an offer but I would've gone all out for both of them. It's not just exclusive to those two either. I think they need to be going after talent more aggressively in general. Their roster needs a shot in the arm.


AEW does not have the job security that WWE has. You gotta realise that wrestling is a job at the end of the day. If I wanted to collect a guaranteed pay check, I would sign with WWE as well. Some people do not have the passion that Moxley has. AEW are probably not trying to go down the WCW route, which was to provide massive contracts at the expense of the owners.

AEW are in this for the long game rather than become an overnight success. For me it's a good sign.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

BulletClubFangirl said:


> When exactly? AJ's contract was coming up around Wrestlemania season and *Sasha was sitting out, tweeting about being unhappy and flirting with AEW until she resigned with WWE as well*. There were short windows of opportunity for both of them. Maybe AEW made an offer but I would've gone all out for both of them. It's not just exclusive to those two either. I think they need to be going after talent more aggressively in general. Their roster needs a shot in the arm.


She still had at least 2 years of contract with the WWE at that point.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

imthegame19 said:


> Next time you are gonna spend all this time writing all this. It should be about something that matters. Not enhancement talent, jobbers/Managers or complaining about preshow matches etc. Or how long a match went when the match was good lol. Not to mention every thing you mentioned is stuff we also see on number 1 wrestling company. Only they arent enhancement talent, jobbers and have been used on t.v. alot.


Just because it’s not at the top of the card doesn’t mean it isn’t nepotism. Just because it’s not at the top of the card doesn’t mean it’s not important. Just because WWE does something, doesn’t mean AEW can do the same thing. 



imthegame19 said:


> Yes because people really care who the enhancement talent is. While glorified managers that are over with crowd is such a big deal. I feel really good about how good AEW is doing. When nitpicking and bashing is over guys who barely even on tv. Haha.


This attention to detail, and the loving care that goes into constructing each element of a presentation is exactly what makes AEW so great. Their new slogan: All Elite Wrestling — who gives a fuck? 



rbl85 said:


> They were under contract.


AJ Styles’ contract came up. He chose WWE. Shinsuke Nakamura’s contract came up. He chose WWE. Randy Orton’s contract came up. He chose WWE. The Usos’ contracts came up. They chose WWE. Cain Velasquez was a free agent. He chose WWE. CM Punk was a free agent. He chose WWE. Are you detecting a pattern here?


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

The Wood said:


> Just because it’s not at the top of the card doesn’t mean it isn’t nepotism. Just because it’s not at the top of the card doesn’t mean it’s not important. Just because WWE does something, doesn’t mean AEW can do the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol Yes when people talk about other companies they bring up jobbers and glorfied managers. This is only done with AEW. The fact they get brought up more then the actual talent uses shows clear bias. I'm sure Brooklyn Brawler was more talked then Hulk Hogan in the 90s.


----------



## Joe Gill (Jun 29, 2019)

Another problem is that they are trying to make everyone on the roster happy by squeezing as many matches in dynamite and dark as possible since they are the only shows. I would make Dark 20-30 minutes longer... and take 20-30 minutes of the worst matches on Dynamite and put them on Dark.... and use that time on Dynamite for more segments and promos. Drama sells. Not random Japanese moustache lady... save that crap for Dark.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

imthegame19 said:


> Lol Yes when people talk about other companies they bring up jobbers and glorfied managers. This is only done with AEW. The fact they get brought up more then the actual talent uses shows clear bias. I'm sure Brooklyn Brawler was more talked then Hulk Hogan in the 90s.


This is a bad take. I am annoyed because I agree with The Wood, again.

Your jobbers/ enhancement talent is important. They are what get the talent you are trying to get over.... well, over

Brooklyn brawler wasn't a main event, but when trying to get the newest babyface over, his job was to look credible enough to do it. 

Why should I hate PAC for beating up Nakazawa, I mean Kenny wasn't worried about him when Moxley beat his ass, so why should I care that someone else does.

And that is what people here won't respond too, the storytelling is creatively bankrupt, and it bleeds into the main event.

Kris Statlander and Jon Moxley literally have the same exact storyline going on right now. 
So yes, it does make a difference, because without credible jobbers, you don't build anyone up.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

Not signing wrestlers to exclusive contracts and not running house shows so they have to kiss podunk indie asses because they need their green talent to have to work those indies because AEW can't afford to run house shows. So a AEW Women's Title match is deemed less important to the #1 contender than wresting a BAR wrestling match. And AEW has to bend over for Joey Ryan because otherwise he won't book AEW talent in the future.

It's not wrestler friendly, it's just weakness. Put your friends indie over the fan base you are trying to establish and build as you bleed one time viewers left and right.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> This is a bad take. I am annoyed because I agree with The Wood, again.
> 
> Your jobbers/ enhancement talent is important. They are what get the talent you are trying to get over.... well, over
> 
> ...



Maybe Hogan and Brawler wasnt best example. My point is all wrestling companies have job guys or bring guys in to job. Who are no different then the guys AEW has. When trolls try to bash the company talent they bash the job guys or managers. Not the guys who are showcased every week. It's beyond ridiculous at this point. 


Also Omega was hurt from his match with Moxley when he faced Nakuzawa(who was trying to get revenge for his friend). While Moxley didn't him down or do anything excessive. He just beat him and that was end of things. Big difference between that and what Pac did by kidnapping him. 


How do Moxley and Statlander have same story? Moxley is being offered to join Inner Circle. Because Jericho fears him and doesn't wanna defend title against him. While Brandi/Awesome Kong want her to join them. Because they see her as talented. Two different agendas and story behind them.


----------



## the_flock (Nov 23, 2016)

BulletClubFangirl said:


> Tony should've gone after bigger names more aggressively imo. AJ and Sasha would've done wonders for their roster and both were more realistic than Punk in retrospect.


It's not just them though. They lost Kylie Rae who was already signed up to them. Priscilla Kelly, Tenille Dashwood, Mercedes Martinez, Teal Piper, Ivelisse, ODB, Brian Pillman Jr., have all appeared on AEW. 

Then there's the likes of Eli Drake, Aron Stevens,Rhino,RVD and more.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

the_flock said:


> It's not just them though. They lost Kylie Rae who was already signed up to them. Priscilla Kelly, Tenille Dashwood, Mercedes Martinez, Teal Piper, Ivelisse, ODB, Brian Pillman Jr., have all appeared on AEW.
> 
> Then there's the likes of Eli Drake, Aron Stevens,Rhino,RVD and more.


They passed on Tenille. Teal Piper is not a wrestler - didnt start training until after the CBR. Mercedes Martinez has a real job and isn't going to give that up to work one Wednesday a week for AEW. Ivelisse was passed on because they want a shot at Tessa in a years time. ODB is cringy garbage. Priscilla Kelly is married to Darby Allin - she had bad pub around her and probably waiting a bit, also she's not that good either. Pillman Jr probably holding out for WWE after his MLW deal runs out - or at least to become a free agent for a bidding war. MLW lets MJF and Havok sign as they don't have exclusive deals as long as they serve out their MLW dates. Likely offered the same for Pillman Jr.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic (Jun 9, 2017)

imthegame19 said:


> Maybe Hogan and Brawler wasnt best example. My point is all wrestling companies have job guys or bring guys in to job. Who are no different then the guys AEW has. When trolls try to bash the company talent they bash the job guys or managers. Not the guys who are showcased every week. It's beyond ridiculous at this point.
> 
> 
> Also Omega was hurt from his match with Moxley when he faced Nakuzawa(who was trying to get revenge for his friend). While Moxley didn't him down or do anything excessive. He just beat him and that was end of things. Big difference between that and what Pac did by kidnapping him.
> ...


Your example was wrong, no matter who toy put in there. 

The point of enhancement talent is to get a guy over, whether it be a debut, or furthering a story.

Those guys are vital and important to a company, especially one with a weekly story. But that is the problem with AEW, the is no focus on who they want to get over. 

Private party beat the Bucks, lose in the next round, and then just disappear.

Darby Allin had a world title shot, and then just stopped coming on TV. Could you imagine if that happened in any other show, it would be just as ridiculous. 

This is going to sound pointed, and it isnt... but offs, can we stop having fans tey to "tell" the story when it is obvious it's just interpretation. 

It takes 30 seconds to tell that story on TV and it wasn't. because once again, they don't have anyone to keep shit in line to say these things to them.

Jericho(a heel) offered Moxley a place in the Inner Circle, btw... Jericho has never even implied he did this out of fear. 

Brandi Rhodes offered Statlander a place in the nightmare collective, they are literally the same story. 

Heel offers face a place in their faction as opposed to having to worry about face as an enemy.

WCW did this right to get DDP over, AEW for some reason is rushing it AND running the story with two people.

This all goes on one person: Tony Khan.

You want the answer to what is wrong, you have Jacksonville Dixie down there doing stunners on his talent while his TV show has looked like shit. 

They then claim how they book in advance, but couldn't get the one talent's dates right. 

The devil is in the details, AEW needs to start paying attention, or it won't end pretty


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

Supostcity said:


> So what is it you think made them popular in the first place?





LifeInCattleClass said:


> BTE
> Standing up against ‘the machine’ - seen in various BTE shows with the ‘invasion’ and pot shots
> Highly athletic, spot based wrestling for the Bucks
> Long, interwoven storylines which sometimes took 6months to a year to unfold
> ...


Being an alternative to WWE is the answer. Fans were desperate for a popular alternative they would have cheered any old crap they were being served.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

DMD Mofomagic said:


> Your example was wrong, no matter who toy put in there.
> 
> The point of enhancement talent is to get a guy over, whether it be a debut, or furthering a story.
> 
> ...


I agree with putting guys like Darby in big matches and doing nothing next week. That is booking they really need to get better at. I disagree on just about the rest of it. Especially Moxley and Statlander storyline. It's obvious what Jericho is doing and why. We don't need some long promo to explain it. While jobbers don't make main event guys look strong in 2019. Maybe mid card guys do that but that's it. So you are way overblowing that. We see Eric Rowan crush jobbers every week on Raw. Those guys are credible? We saw Braun Strowman do that for months a few years ago too. Which is where James Ellsworth came from who is no different then what AEW doing with say Marko Stunt by the way.


Lol Tony Khan doing stunner and people actually trying to make a thing about it. Is most overblown thing I seen in wrestling in a while. Guys for years have doing silly crap off camera. I remember last year Elias and Finn Balor sang the song from A Star was Born. Yet Tony Khan does shitty stunner and people are bashing it?


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

imthegame19 said:


> Next time you are gonna spend all this time writing all this. It should be about something that matters. Not enhancement talent, jobbers/Managers or complaining about preshow matches etc. Or how long a match went when the match was good lol. Not to mention every thing you mentioned is stuff we also see on number 1 wrestling company. Only they arent enhancement talent, jobbers and have been used on t.v. alot.


It all matters it's an overall package as I said in my original post.

Enhancement talent/jobbers & managers/pre show matches all are important aka your toilers and your future stars. Hell, if done correctly your midcard acts can become draws themselves which is why when you go back and watch a WWE show from 20 years ago everyone is getting cheered almost as much as one another and everyone was making money.

The match being good is such an indy mentality. You're doing national television if an unknown goes more than a few minutes with a top star your audience automatically assumes that the top star can't be very good because he's going back and forth with unknowns. You can build the unknowns up but to do that they need victories over guys with name value who aren't stars. This is why some token veterans should be in AEW's midcard who are recognisable and known outside of the indies or outside of AEW.

Get out of this "B-B-But WWE does it also!" mentality. Nobody here is comparing the two and AEW is a LONG LONG way off even being in the same room as WWE. WWE has much more room for error AEW does not.

The problem is they have been used on TV a lot. Most are undeserving and quite a few have only been around for a few years and never been on TV before.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Because I've explained it to you: The potential audience giving this shit a chance needs to have their emotions understood and catered to by a representative on the program. It's that simple. If punches are clearly missing in an extended shot, an announcer saying "Oh my god! Look at those shots barrelling down!" is what actually buries you. People don't understand what burying means. It means when you get so far under instead of over you've got no chance to make money.
> 
> JR knows this. It's not his opinion. It's his experience as a fucking god at what he does. That's why he was one of the first names leaked for this fucking thing.


I'm sorry, but this is bull of the highest order. JR's job has always been, as a performer, and he is a performer, to sell the action. If he can't sell it, he should keep his mouth shut. You're over complicating his role to make it fit your point, but you can't refine JR's job because everyone into wrestling knows what that job is. He isn't a shoot commentator, he isn't a god. He's a salesman."Burying" someone is simply defined as making someone or something less appealing to the crowd. When he talks about what people cannot do, or how busted an angle is--even to help is credibility, as you put it-- the only person he's putting over is himself, and that isn't his job.




> JR supports the program by being there, showing up, and calling the good shit like it matters. He needs credibility to do that. If he called Riho like a serious bad-ass, that credibility would be gone, because people can visibly see that she's not -- something you actually pointed out without realizing that that is the burial.


You don't have to lie to put people over. Rhio is already over. It's JR's job to understand what makes her over and to leverage it for people who aren't exactly sold. You'll never see a car salesman undercut his sale by bringing up things that would hurt the sale unless that honesty would help him make the sale happen. Is reminding everyone that Rhio is small (when they have friken eyeballs) doing anything to sell her? No! The notion that JR is being more credible (whatever the heck that means for a kayfabe sports commentator) when he lampshades a flaw, a quirk, or qualities he just isn't fond of, or qualifies every positive with verbal asterisks is a laughable point to make. Especially considering that most people admit that JR is nowhere near as good as he was.





> Sounds like you can't fucking read or comprehend what I'm saying. The Undertaker and Kane having a fucking hoss fight is not the same thing as The Dark Order and Riho. I'm sure he did call shit on Kane's stuff (I can't remember the exact segment, but the comedy they had Kane doing with The Stooges comes to mind). JR also infamously made a snide call when Taker killed X-Pac's momentum when Pac was getting pretty fucking over. Something about "literally burying his career right now." Taker and Kane, though, for as limited as they could be in the ring at the time, was a fucking hoss fight and a well-built up and effective story using a top guy that had been around and actually drawn money at some point. They're totally different things.


It's hard to comprehend something as retardly inconsistent as what you put forth, but I will make the attempt. This has nothing to do with Kane and Undertaker being hosses, and has everything to do with them being inherently stupid gimmicks. No less stupid than a 93 pound women's champion or a wrestling dinosaur. According to your logic, it's JR's job to remind us that for the sake of his credibility. Yet here you are, making excuses for him because Kane and Undertaker were characters that you in the benefit of hindsight know to be all time draws. Character's I'm guessing you've personally enjoyed. Now if JR's job wasn't to help these guys get over, why weren't we constantly reminded how obviously idiotic their gimmicks were? How they were slow and not the greatest technical wrestlers? Why in the heck is how successful they were even something you'd point to to defend JR's lack of shoot commentary in their regard, when the issue isn't their success, but JR's credibility? And, and this is funny, why do you have to point to a moment in which JR of all people bemoans talent being buried by another competitor to defend JR doing just that in AEW? How much self awareness does your position lack?

I'm here to say what difference does it make if the angles are good or not? You say that JR's job is to call it like he sees it, and unless JR didn't think the idea of a zombie cowboy was inherently stupid, you aren't holding him to an even standard for things you know to have been a success in WWF. If a 93 pound can draw, what difference does it make what JR personally thinks about it? The answer is it doesn't.




> I want AEW to succeed. So does JR. He likes those cheques coming in. That's why he calls the shit the shit. And yes, JR did bury the stupid crap. That's a large part of the reason he had so much heat with Russo. JR is not the one killing kayfabe when he calls it. The kayfabe is dead when the work isn't working. That's why they call it a work.


It's not JR's job to preempt the failure of an angle. He's just one man, not a prophet. And if you honestly think JR burying someone who people are already behind, one of the few ratings draws in the women's division, is the same thing as him having a mostly back stage heat with a primadonna creative, then you aren't being honest is the slightest.





> Fans don't need to be seeing the shit JR has to call. How do you not get that? JR draws because of his credibility. Holy fuck, we're back here again. People aren't going to watch the show because JR is shitting on it. You've made
> 
> that up. I'm saying there is less chance of them running away because he can empathize with their perspective. JR's opinion probably matters to a lot more people than a lot of these wrestlers do in total, at the moment. And they do themselves no favors by not factoring it in whilst paying him that huge amount of money for his expertise,


Everything flying out of your mouth is CONJECTURE. Show me the numbers that JR's AEW style of commentary is helping them draw. Until then, you're saying nothing,






> JR wouldn't denigrate the program if it weren't visibly bad. He's using his eyes to watch it, and when he sees something that makes him go"Whoa-oh," he calls it, because he knows what the viewer can see at home. It's that simple.


More BS. Not everything that JR pokes at on commentary is inherently bad. A lot of it is simply not his taste. And some of the stuff he ignores is actually inherently bad. Some examples. Brandy Rhodes' promos are as bad as something can get on AEW. Not one word from JR on that. AEW's audio issues are objectively bad. Not a word from JR on that either. Those punches from the Dark Order? No remark. Maybe on twitter, but not on air. As a professional, his personal taste is not anyone's concern, yet we are bombarded with it. If this was about credibility, you'd expect him to lampshade uncontroversial suckage. The fact he doesn't suggests to me that it has less to do with credibility and more to do with JR using his position to leverage small creative changes he believes he can get away with. Jungle Jack for instance. Nobody calls Jungle Boy Jungle jack, yet JR still tries to get it over. It's obvious he's using his booth to lobby for that name change. Why ignore botches like that sucky punching last week, but constantly talk about Rhio's height as if no one can see it? He's lobbying for a bigger champion. He's only doing this because AEW has green creative. That would never fly under Vince. You know it. I know it. This implies he does want AEW to succeed, but that isn't the way to do it.




> You are making the mistake of thinking that when I'm talking about being honest about things you can see, you think I mean being honest about things you can't. Lying to fans and saying that you are sold out when there are clearly empty seats visible on camera is a mistake. So don't show the empty seats. If you don't want a tiny girl's feather-like offense being called like that, don't show it. Unprofessional would be getting a good wrestler and then saying it was all smoke and mirrors, folks. But there's no smoke or mirror to this, so you've got to call the bare bones. You have to. It's what the viewer is being presented.


Then explain why JR is always making remarks about intangibles like names, or things only a smark would care about and ignoring some things that are obvious, like bad punches, spots, promos, or technical issues? It's not about being a straight shooter. It's about JR using his position to undermine the booking.



> JR isn't the issue with AEW not getting eyeballs, friend, lol. When he's on TV, he still does his job splendidly and does his best to keep things on track. If there's no track he can't not call a train-wreck. That AEW is a train-wreck is the responsibility of other people.


I didn't say JR was the issue. I said he's dead weight. And for a new company that needs to be firing on all cylinders, that in of itself is an issue. I like JR and would prefer him to stay, but if he doesn't want to use his powers to put the company over and would rather be pissy on the mic, he can take that to his podcast.



> And JR used to do it all the time in WWE. And you know that, or you just weren't paying attention.


Maybe he did, but I don't think so. Not in the way we're talking here. And I've heard JR put over many a retarded thing on that show that he would scoff at on this one. And even if he did, WWF was hot. AEW is a fledgling company. Rhio is the women's division, atm. Pull the rug out from under her and what do you have?


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Chip Chipperson said:


> It all matters it's an overall package as I said in my original post.
> 
> Enhancement talent/jobbers & managers/pre show matches all are important aka your toilers and your future stars. Hell, if done correctly your midcard acts can become draws themselves which is why when you go back and watch a WWE show from 20 years ago everyone is getting cheered almost as much as one another and everyone was making money.
> 
> ...


Wow it's not 1990 dude. People know its fake and they care more about exciting matches, characters, storylines or promos. Nobody gonna think Jon Moxley or Kenny Omega is less good. Because they had competitve matches with Joey Janela. They are gonna say oh that was a good match Omega or Moxley had with Janela. Not oh those guys look like duds because it took them more then two minutes to beat him.

Thats something that had changed in wrestling business. Just like a tiny guy like Daniel Bryan can be a top guy in WWE. That is what wrestling fans know today. So if stuff is acceptable to wrestling fans in the number one company. You can't say it's not acceptable for AEW.


Yes something has to be believable to a point. I don't think you can send Marko Stunt out there and have him go 20 minute with Moxley or Omega. But in this day and age guys who are 5-8 and weight 180-200 pounds have competitive matches with top talent all the time.


Plus there is plenty of data with ratings and YouTube viewers etc. That watched and enjoyed those matches. Which makes Janela a good mid card act for the company like it or not. So you need to get with the times or modern wrestling isn't for you. Also I already explained to you these guys havent been used a lot. 1 to 2 appearances actually in the ring and not managing isn't a lot.


While AEW has more room for error then people want to admit. Like I said many times they aren't going anywhere for years. It would take year plus of bad ratings, bad attendance for them to even consider closing the company. While none of that is going to happen with company built around Moxley, Jericho, Cody, Omega, Page, Pac, MJF etc. With popular tag team in Young Bucks in tag division.


Right now they are doing best non NBA ratings for TNT (even beat them in November) and just sold out a ppv in 53 minutes. Even with all the trolls and haters trying to push doom and gloom agenda. I really need to stop wasting my time with you people and make ignore list.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl (Jan 30, 2016)

optikk sucks said:


> AEW does not have the job security that WWE has. You gotta realise that wrestling is a job at the end of the day. If I wanted to collect a guaranteed pay check, I would sign with WWE as well. Some people do not have the passion that Moxley has. AEW are probably not trying to go down the WCW route, which was to provide massive contracts at the expense of the owners.
> 
> AEW are in this for the long game rather than become an overnight success. For me it's a good sign.


A fair counterpoint but I think there's a difference between going after talent who could really get people buzzing and offering a million+ dollar contract to the likes of Mike Awesome like Eric did back in the day. AEW is playing things a little too safe imo. We'll see how it works out for them over the long-term though.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

BulletClubFangirl said:


> A fair counterpoint but I think there's a difference between going after talent who could really get people buzzing and offering a million+ dollar contract to the likes of Mike Awesome like Eric did back in the day. AEW is playing things a little too safe imo. We'll see how it works out for them over the long-term though.


I don't think their playing it too safe. They can offer wrestlers lighter schedule, more creative freedom and good money still. It doesn't make sense for a brand new company with strategy and business plan to be profitable in 2020. To be throwing huge money at wrestlers in their 40s. It's not like they didn't try to sign CM Punk, Cain Velasquez and apparently Orton. But obviously either they weren't interested or they didn't feel those guys were worth it. Once the money got too high.


In 2020 there will be more talent that becomes available. Sure they might not be top big name guys. But there will be plenty of guys that still have more to offer or can be repacked into major asset for AEW.


I know fans them to go "all in" right now. But the Khan family knows how to build a business. Right now their tv ratings have been good overall. As has been attendance and ppv buys. Well you start paying more guys a few million per year. Well all of the sudden you're ratings arent bringing in enough revenue and either is ticket sales or ppv buys etc. Which causes you to lose more money when your company wasn't showing enough signs of growth yet to do that.


With history of WCW and TNA very few wrestlers made huge impacts on ratings, buys, or ticket sales. That would be worth paying them BIG money. The best plan in wrestling has always been to create your own stars. Or repackage guys from other companies and make them your own(Example Foley, Stone Cold, Triple H, Taker etc).


That's what AEW has to do but fans need to accept that will take some time. If you can get more established stars to join. Well that's great but it have to be more of a Moxley situation. Then wrestlers chasing the biggest check possible.


----------



## Benoit's Weight Machine (Dec 28, 2019)

Longtime lurker here. I usually choose not talk wrestling on the internet, however this topic has really interested me. I am a so-called “lapsed fan” in my early 40s. I was a diehard WWF fan since the mid-80s and a WWF and WCW fan throughout the Monday Night Wars, however I stopped watching wrestling completely back in 2003. I have really missed wrestling but just could not stomach the horrible product the WWE has been putting out. I seem to be exactly the type of fan that AEW is looking for. I have zero interest in the WWE so I feel my perspective is somewhat important. I heard about all the buzz after double or nothing and checked it out. I almost instantly became hooked by AEW, however the Dark Order debacle on the last Dynamite may end up being the last straw for me if they do not get their act together fast. If you look at the strong start of AEW and the steadily declining numbers, they really speak for themselves. Clearly a lot of people had interest in their product but interest has sharply declined and continues to do so. 

Double or Nothing, AEW’s hot start and wasted momentum

Go back and watch this show. It had a different feel. Fyter Fest had a similar feel. I can’t put my finger on what it is but it just seemed more credible and more “big time”. This feel just dropped off for Fight for the Fallen and has not come back. They need to find this groove again and present Dynamite in a similar way. Quite a few of my friends are lapsed fans as well and they all had similar reactions as me after watching this show. So many of them were really excited and couldn’t wait for their next show, however most of the enthusiasm amongst my friends completely vanished sometime between Double or Nothing and Fyter Fest. I have no idea why this happened. Perhaps they enjoyed the show but just weren’t ready to be full time wrestling fans again. It kind of makes me wonder what would have happened if AEW capitalized on this early momentum and started Dynamite in early June.

Win-Loss records have to go

This is a good idea in theory and I was receptive to it at first but I feel this has more negative results than positive ones. Not only does is essentially force the 50-50 booking which plagues the WWE, but it is a great way to book yourself into a corner. I would be willing to see how a toned down version of this goes where perhaps they start noting a wrestler’s record after they have 3 wins or 3 losses in a row.

They need to knock if off with the “big announcements”

These are causing way more damage than it seems. They hype an upcoming “big announcement” only for it to end up being a Dynamite venue about 3 months later in a particular city. This makes the fans in that particular city happy but it pisses off the other 90% of their fanbase who are nowhere near said city. They get stronger backlash everytime they do this. By now it is clear that it pisses the fans off but they continue to do it anyway.

On the subject of goodwill with the fans, AEW claims that they listen to the fans yet their actions indicate the complete opposite. Their top executives are deleting their twitter because they don’t like what their fans have to say. The fans have made it abundantly clear that they have no interest in Britt Baker, Brandi or the Dark Order but AEW has little to no interest in giving the fans what they want in that regard. This is right out of the WWE’s playbook of pushing their chosen stars (Triple H, Cena, Roman, etc.) despite fan sentiment. This in my opinion is AEW’s most critical shortcoming at the moment. I am not saying they have to cater to the fans every whim but they need to recognize when something just isn't over and back off.

AEW doesn’t seem to understand how to get new stars over

Darby Allin was almost instantly over. His rapid push culminates in a title shot, then he is nowhere to be seen for the following 2 weeks. Similar story with Kris Statlander, she generated a lot of buzz upon her debut then disappeared for a week. Why the hell do they do this??? It absolutely kills any momentum. MJF is by far the most egregious example of this. He is arguably the hottest heel in the business right now but I’m not sure he’s EVER made consecutive appearances on Dynamite. People who are over such as Darby, Luchasauras, MJF, Moxley and Statlander need to be on TV EVERY week with absolutely no exceptions. Can you imagine if the WWF did this with Austin in 1997?

The commercial breaks are absolutely brutal

I don’t know how they determine these commercial breaks but they need to rethink their approach because they are going to breaks at the worst possible times. The commercial breaks are also way too long and way too frequent. I don’t recall it being this way during the Monday Night Wars. Why can’t they have quick 60-120 second breaks between the matches or during extended entrances? There are a lot of things that play well to the live crowd but not so much on TV such as Pentagon’s ridiculous glove spot or Orange Cassidy’s stuff. Why not sneak in a commercial or 2 during those things? This would keep the crowd hot coming back from break while preventing the casuals from changing the channel.

House shows

I can appreciate the benefit of a lighter schedule however they need to do at least one weekend house show. This can be optional for certain people but it is not a good look to have AEW wrestlers working, and in some cases, prioritizing the indies. Offer the option of a weekend house show which is sanctioned by AEW. Use this as an opportunity to try things out before doing it on TV. Hell, this can even be a source of even more revenue if they stream it on BR live for just a few bucks ($3-$5).

Roster problems/Too many return matches

How many times are we going to get Hangman vs PAC? Young Bucks vs Lucha Bros? Young Bucks vs Santana & Ortiz? Variations of these same matchups in tags and trios? Obviously AEW doesn’t have a big enough roster to sustain a weekly show. What are they doing about this? Why sign Hager to what appears to be a non-wrestling contract when he is sorely needed in the ring? I understand that he’s really green but why not have Wardlow partake in some squash matches? They hyped him up with vignettes just to have him stand next to MJF during his (rare) appearances. To make this worse, there’s no help on the horizon as it seems like most free agents have no interest whatsoever in coming to AEW. Most Impact, ROH, MLW and especially WWE wrestlers are staying loyal to their current companies. Why is this? The sudden emergence of a second major league should NOT result in these third rate indies having such a stranglehold on their free agents who are declining big money and the opportunity to be on a major cable network every week. Can you imagine Malenko, Jericho, Benoit and Guerrero declining WCW offers just to stay with ECW in 1995? How about Chris Candido turning down the WWF to stay with Smoky Mountain? This whole situation is so implausible that I am convinced that something very strange is going on behind the scenes which we are not privy to.

How do they fix this? Jim Ross has a successful track record in talent relations and recruitment. Why not draw upon his experience and put him in charge of talent relations? He has the title of senior advisor but as evidenced by his commentary, he clearly is not enthused by the booking. Why not take the Executive VP titles away from the workers and give it to JR? Workers should not be the bookers. This has a proven track record of failure (Dusty in JCP, Kevin Nash in WCW, Hogan in WCW, Jarrett in TNA, etc.). Why not establish a booking committee? Jake the Snake and Terry Funk have great minds for the business and have had booking aspirations in the past. JR, Jake, Funk, Tony, and lets say Cody (I’d be willing to make an exception for him as he has done a great job booking himself thus far and he is essentially a co-founder of the company) sound like great choices for these roles.

Lack of innovation

There has been a lot of buzz in the wrestling world in 2019. It almost feels like we are on the verge of something big and people are anticipating another wrestling boom. In order to have a boom, we are going to need something new, innovative and completely different and AEW just hasn’t given us that. The 80s boom was precipitated by Hulk Hogan. He was basically a larger-than-life comic book character/superhero come to life. People were tired of the same boring recycled characters usually playing to ethnic stereotypes. The fans wanted something different and were given that with Hogan and business skyrocketed. Business dropped off in the early 90s because they drove this formula into the ground after 8 years of the same Hogan matches with the same interchangeable monster opponents. The Four Horsemen were another innovative idea. No one had seen a heel faction before, however this has been run into the ground over and over and over again and the Horsemen almost became a parody of themselves by the late 90s. When the WWF was stale in the 90s, it was revitalized by Steve Austin. The NWO was another groundbreaking concept in having a faction invade WCW which had a certain element of realism. This too was ran into the ground.

AEW needs to come up with something different which was innovative as the above examples. Rehashing the Horsemen/NWO with the Inner Circle just isn’t going to cut it. Jericho is much better suited to being a loner. He should be booked as a meaner and more threatening version of his heel WCW persona. Creepy cult factions are also not going to cut it either nor are they well received by the crowd. Dark Order seemed to be moving in a promising direction with the vignettes but then they totally pissed that away when they decided that a jobber tag team under masks was the perfect ending to their go home show of 2019.

History shows that AEW is extremely vulnerable

Some people are overreacting and saying that AEW will be dead in a few months as a result of a ratings loss or a bad show. This is not as far-fetched as it seems. AEW is far more vulnerable than we realize. I would like to point out that ECW and WCW were bonafide major league wrestling organizations which both met their demise when their respective TV networks canceled their highly rated TV shows on a whim. TNA almost met their demise for the same reason. Do not think that this cannot happen to AEW. All it takes is another Jamie Kellner to come along. If I was Tony Khan, I would be looking to get some sort of contingency plans in place ASAP whether it be establishing their own streaming network or boosting their international distribution.

Tony Khan himself has the potential to make or break wrestling in the US however he needs to address the above issues even if that means that he has to make some very hard decisions. I really hope AEW can get back on the right track.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

Benoit's Weight Machine said:


> Longtime lurker here. I usually choose not talk wrestling on the internet, however this topic has really interested me. I am a so-called “lapsed fan” in my early 40s. I was a diehard WWF fan since the mid-80s and a WWF and WCW fan throughout the Monday Night Wars, however I stopped watching wrestling completely back in 2003. I have really missed wrestling but just could not stomach the horrible product the WWE has been putting out. I seem to be exactly the type of fan that AEW is looking for. I have zero interest in the WWE so I feel my perspective is somewhat important. I heard about all the buzz after double or nothing and checked it out. I almost instantly became hooked by AEW, however the Dark Order debacle on the last Dynamite may end up being the last straw for me if they do not get their act together fast. If you look at the strong start of AEW and the steadily declining numbers, they really speak for themselves. Clearly a lot of people had interest in their product but interest has sharply declined and continues to do so.
> 
> Double or Nothing, AEW’s hot start and wasted momentum
> 
> ...


Your avi is funny, your post was very structured, organized, and well thought out and put....please stick around! 

I pretty much agree with everything you said but even if I disagreed, like I do with @imthegame19 sometimes and other long posters, I still like seeing posts that have thought and intelligence put behind them. I'm a sucker for long posts that address multiple points.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

> Win-Loss records have to go
> 
> This is a good idea in theory and I was receptive to it at first but I feel this has more negative results than positive ones. Not only does is essentially force the 50-50 booking which plagues the WWE, but it is a great way to book yourself into a corner.


I can't say I agree with this. The thing about a win-loss record is that when used correctly, it protects people from the negative effects of 50-50 booking. When a person loses, it no longer becomes "well, they just suck now." Instead you can rationalize the loss in a way that unrecorded win/losses cannot, and you no longer have to depend on the match quality to protect the wrestlers. Suddenly, they lose because they were bested, not necessarily because they aren't any good. (It's kinda hard to argue that the second best record holder is a loser.) 

The volatility in the win-losses comes not from the record being kept but from a natural consequence of attempting to look like a real competition. In reality, people lose matches. If two people have a rocket strapped to their back, whenever they face off, one of them will have to take that L. If this was booked like other shows we wouldn't be able to have angles that are a natural consequence of the records of the wrestlers and it would be more obvious who was going to win or have their match interfered with.

And sure, it may put them in a creative bind, but this forces bookers to take a slower approach at building pushes or depushes. Everyone has to win to justify a title match.And everyone has to lose to justify not being in the title picture. In a competition, even a fake one, a guy who shows up doesn't need to be getting a title shot. If actual combat sports can sell, despite this reality, so can a made up one. 

And lastly, everything can be done away with with a season change. With this, you know new angles will happen and new story tension can be created. Kenny Omega, for instance, will have a fresh start to build a record to match his pedigree. A fresh start can effectively wipe away the stink of past loses for jobbers, and call into question the continued success of last season's winners.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> I can't say I agree with this. The thing about a win-loss record is that when used correctly, it protects people from the negative effects of 50-50 booking. When a person loses, it no longer becomes "well, they just suck now." Instead you can rationalize the loss in a way that unrecorded win/losses cannot, and you no longer have to depend on the match quality to protect the wrestlers. Suddenly, they lose because they were bested, not necessarily because they aren't any good. (It's kinda hard to argue that the second best record holder is a loser.)
> 
> The volatility in the win-losses comes not from the record being kept but from a natural consequence of attempting to look like a real competition. In reality, people lose matches. If two people have a rocket strapped to their back, whenever they face off, one of them will have to take that L. If this was booked like other shows we wouldn't be able to have angles that are a natural consequence of the records of the wrestlers and it would be more obvious who was going to win or have their match interfered with.
> 
> ...


But you don't actually need to keep an official W-L record to do any of what you said. Just book things logically. You want to get somebody to the title push them. You want to do a feud between two top guys, push them. This is just a silly thing they added for no reason. Wrestling isn't a sport and there's no need to do silly things like W-L records pretending it is. The fact that they feel the need to reset records just points to the fact a W-L record is stupid.


----------



## Benoit's Weight Machine (Dec 28, 2019)

DOTL said:


> I can't say I agree with this. The thing about a win-loss record is that when used correctly, it protects people from the negative effects of 50-50 booking. When a person loses, it no longer becomes "well, they just suck now." Instead you can rationalize the loss in a way that unrecorded win/losses cannot, and you no longer have to depend on the match quality to protect the wrestlers. Suddenly, they lose because they were bested, not necessarily because they aren't any good. (It's kinda hard to argue that the second best record holder is a loser.)
> 
> The volatility in the win-losses comes not from the record being kept but from a natural consequence of attempting to look like a real competition. In reality, people lose matches. If two people have a rocket strapped to their back, whenever they face off, one of them will have to take that L. If this was booked like other shows we wouldn't be able to have angles that are a natural consequence of the records of the wrestlers and it would be more obvious who was going to win or have their match interfered with.
> 
> ...


Honestly I think you have thought this out far more thoroughly than the powers that be at AEW. While I agree that wins should be a requirement for title matches, I still feel that they need to tone down this aspect or perhaps only emphasize the records of the top contenders. If two wrestlers with 3-0 records have a big showdown, I can appreciate the stakes, however I feel that good booking with the proper build can present this same scenario without having 6 midcarders eat pins and now you have the need to rebuild them before doing anything significant with them. Kenny is an example of someone who has suffered due to the W-L system.


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

Lheurch said:


> Chuck Taylor is the invisible hand grenade dude. He also has clearly never seen the inside of a gym. Trent needs to drop that tool and be a singles guy.


I've said that since they started teaming in New Japan.


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

Chip Chipperson said:


> They DO hire their friends, what are you talking about? Brandon Cutler, Nakazawa and Stunt would never get jobs on the number 2 wrestling company in the United States if they didn't have friends running the creative. Nobody says those guys are being pushed but there is obviously much better enhancement talent out there yet they're being used.
> 
> Here is a fact for you. Michael Nakazawa speaks fluent English and was in charge of communicating with the foreign talents that went into DDT Japan. He would very likely have been responsible for Kenny Omega getting his first full time gig in Japan which lead to NJPW which lead to Omega becoming the star he is today. He also would've been a massive help for Omega who would've likely struggled to feel at home in Japan. Him being there is a reward for his loyalty and friendship over the past however many years.
> 
> ...


Harry Smith is exacy the type of guy they need. He's just a terrible promo


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

imthegame19 said:


> Lol Yes when people talk about other companies they bring up jobbers and glorfied managers. This is only done with AEW. The fact they get brought up more then the actual talent uses shows clear bias. I'm sure Brooklyn Brawler was more talked then Hulk Hogan in the 90s.


You’ve already been dismantled by DMD, but here we go:

I don’t know what your point is even supposed to be. There’s no Hogan in AEW. There’s no Brooklyn Brawler. Your example isn’t analogous. People might have brought up Brooklyn Brawler if he were Michael Nakazawa. You’re comparing AEW, hypothetically, to a wrestling promotion.

Jobbers matter. They’re a part of the show. If people tune in and see shitty job guys, they might not stick around to your main event. The goal isn’t for them to be spoken about, but it’s not to turn viewers away, either.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

Chuck Taylor has something called charisma, something Trent Barretta is completely void of. There is an interesting dynamic when Orange Cassidy is included - it's not a complete straight man/funny man dynamic but there is a situation where Orange Cassidy is both the funny man and the straight man, which allows Chuck to play both/middle man.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

The Wood said:


> You’ve already been dismantled by DMD, but here we go:
> 
> I don’t know what your point is even supposed to be. There’s no Hogan in AEW. There’s no Brooklyn Brawler. Your example isn’t analogous. People might have brought up Brooklyn Brawler if he were Michael Nakazawa. You’re comparing AEW, hypothetically, to a wrestling promotion.
> 
> Jobbers matter. They’re a part of the show. If people tune in and see shitty job guys, they might not stick around to your main event. The goal isn’t for them to be spoken about, but it’s not to turn viewers away, either.


Haha yes I was dismantled if it was 1990. Thanks again for sharing your crappy opinion. Like I said I'm done trying to have actual conversation with you. Sadly you are so bias against the company and clearly have agenda and rooting for it to fail. Someone so closed minded like you isnt worth my time. You already made up your mind and just pushing negativity repeating yourself every day. The sad part is you don't even realize it.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

So, what's happened over the past week or so? You know because I was at The Bucks over Christmas break, trying to address all the criticisms of how to make AEW better. On this website alone, there are hundreds and hundreds of user opinions coming from a select few, with little to no differential between them, but rest assured, we're trying very hard to appease you, the audience. Thank you for your co-operation. Watch AEW Dynamite, Wednesdays at 8PM, on TNT.


----------



## Sir Linko (Oct 10, 2019)

Oh man. I may get some heat for this.

AEW from the beginning wanted to have a more sports-centric wrestling show that wasn't full of zaney and unbelieveable characters. They wanted championships to feel important and records to be a driving force towards that sporty vibe.

NXT is a love-child of WWE, which has always wanted more entertainment, wacky and zaney characters. Characters matter more than Championships and they have no records.

NXT has much more of a sporty feel than AEW. AEW has more of an "anything can happen" wacky and zaney show. 

Between Butcher, Blade, and Bunny. Dark Order, whatever Brandi is doing, Kris Statlander. It seems AEW has trying to be a comic book while NXT is just a great wrestling show with some heated rivalries and prestigious feeling championships.

I still think AEW needs to explain rules if they're going to have lenient refs and whatnot, explain rankings, and start keeping trakc of them better if they're going to still make it a focal point. Release rankings far more often and maybe even make a TV show eventually, 30 minutes before Dynamite, just going through rankings and talking about potential matchups.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> But you don't actually need to keep an official W-L record to do any of what you said. Just book things logically. You want to get somebody to the title push them. You want to do a feud between two top guys, push them. This is just a silly thing they added for no reason. Wrestling isn't a sport and there's no need to do silly things like W-L records pretending it is. The fact that they feel the need to reset records just points to the fact a W-L record is stupid.


It seems weird to me, but on one hand we have people saying "we need to protect kayfabe by making things more realistic" but then on the other hand they say "adhering to any kind of systemic ranking system is bad." This is funny because the fact that people challenge people without proper motivation is one of the least realistic things modern wrestling and the biggest reason, I think, no one is willing to suspend disbelief for it.

One of the things I hate most about "sports entertainment" is that it rarely feels like a sport or entertaining. The angles are never logical because there's no systemic reason to justify the booking, or no way to hold that booking accountable. Doing semi-athletic crap doesn't make something a sport. The element of structured competition does. Wrestlers lacking motivation doesn't make anything entertaining. Giving them a motivation that everyone can easily understand is. And the gold isn't proper motivation. Why? because only the guy getting pushed ever wants it. All the other cats are content with fighting each other for no reason.

Do you think, with the booking AEW has done now, they would make better decisions if there was no accountability? Do you honestly believe that the ranking system is the reason they're having some trouble now? I don't. In fact, I think that the organic storylines rendered from ranking have been some of the bright spots. From Page's frustration, to the concept( not the execution) of a stable that recruits wrestlers with bad records, all of those ideas and more are justified because of a ranking system.

A wipe allows them to re-frame the landscape within the context of what happened in the past, as oppose to unrecorded booking, which just wishes we forgot what happened even just a month ago.

That sounds like something that needs to be refined. Not dropped.




Benoit's Weight Machine said:


> Honestly I think you have thought this out far more thoroughly than the powers that be at AEW. While I agree that wins should be a requirement for title matches, I still feel that they need to tone down this aspect or perhaps only emphasize the records of the top contenders. If two wrestlers with 3-0 records have a big showdown, I can appreciate the stakes, however I feel that good booking with the proper build can present this same scenario without having 6 midcarders eat pins and now you have the need to rebuild them before doing anything significant with them. Kenny is an example of someone who has suffered due to the W-L system.


I don't think getting rid of WL is going to help. All it does is invite laziness in the booking without getting rid of the problems you might find in a record based system. In WWE the only people who win are in the title running. Everyone else is subjected to 50/50 booking until they aren't. A WL system would record what everyone already knows about the wrestler: they have major ground to cover. The added hurdle of that person having to recover from that record is a source of drama in storytelling, and more importantly, realistic. In boxing, losing can often sidetrack a promising career. Some guys never recover from a loss. Having some storyline consequences for losing will displace the vague sense that a wrestler is damaged goods because you can literally see what they need to do to return to their former glory.

The issues you put forth can be solved not by doing away with WLs, but leaning into it them. More systems need to be designed to support it. They need divisions. They need some wins weigh more than others. Weighing streak victories higher can be a good way to put guys who were jobbing into the title picture without having to wipe their record.

All it takes is some creativity. But getting rid of the system altogether guarantees creative entropy.


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Chuck Taylor has something called charisma, something Trent Barretta is completely void of. There is an interesting dynamic when Orange Cassidy is included - it's not a complete straight man/funny man dynamic but there is a situation where Orange Cassidy is both the funny man and the straight man, which allows Chuck to play both/middle man.


Someone not only defending Chuck Taylor but saying he is good? I have seen it all now. Trent, while hardly the best at least looks legit. Chuck looks like he walked in off the street. Most of the guys I cannot stand I can at least understand why someone else might see something in them. Not this guy. I really do not get it.


----------



## One Shed (Jan 7, 2014)

Sir Linko said:


> Oh man. I may get some heat for this.
> 
> AEW from the beginning wanted to have a more sports-centric wrestling show that wasn't full of zaney and unbelieveable characters. They wanted championships to feel important and records to be a driving force towards that sporty vibe.
> 
> ...


AEW might have said that is what they wanted and to present, but they hired Chuck Taylor, Orange Cassidy, Sonny Kiss, Marko Stunt, and others who make that statement ridiculous on its face.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> It seems weird to me, but on one hand we have people saying "we need to protect kayfabe by making things more realistic" but then on the other hand they say "adhering to any kind of systemic ranking system is bad." This is funny because the fact that people challenge people without proper motivation is one of the least realistic things modern wrestling and the biggest reason, I think, no one is willing to suspend disbelief for it.
> 
> One of the things I hate most about "sports entertainment" is that it rarely feels like a sport or entertaining. The angles are never logical because there's no systemic reason to justify the booking, or no way to hold that booking accountable. Doing semi-athletic crap doesn't make something a sport. The element of structured competition does. Wrestlers lacking motivation doesn't make anything entertaining. Giving them a motivation that everyone can easily understand is. And the gold isn't proper motivation. Why? because only the guy getting pushed ever wants it. All the other cats are content with fighting each other for no reason.
> 
> ...


The thing is everything you're saying doesn't need a W-L record to make it happen. You just need to book with common sense for whatever story you're trying to tell. You don't need an official record to tell the story that someone is tired of losing matches or that they joined with someone to get ahead. Wrestling has been telling those stories for ages without W-L records. The fact they have a W-L record isn't a problem, it's just imo a stupid addition to the product.

As far as sports entertainment goes, that's just what wrestling is. You don't like how WWE books that's valid, but a W-L record isn't some fix. Good logical booking is all they needed. Noting wins and losses is fine when that's a part of a storyline, but as a system it's goofy as hell. 

The other suggestion you had is just overly convoluted for no reason. The fact you feel the need to do all of that just furthers how unnecessary all that is. Just book logically, no need to tell us stuff like "oh Page is 25-10 in singles this year".


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> I'm sorry, but this is bull of the highest order. JR's job has always been, as a performer, and he is a performer, to sell the action. If he can't sell it, he should keep his mouth shut. You're over complicating his role to make it fit your point, but you can't refine JR's job because everyone into wrestling knows what that job is. He isn't a shoot commentator, he isn't a god. He's a salesman."Burying" someone is simply defined as making someone or something less appealing to the crowd. When he talks about what people cannot do, or how busted an angle is--even to help is credibility, as you put it-- the only person he's putting over is himself, and that isn't his job.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That is long, and you are not as interesting as me to read, so I won’t. I got as far as you proclaiming to speak for the wrestling industry. You don’t.

A commentator’s job isn’t spin. That’s the real bullshit. That’s what you’re trying to assign to the guy. Make something bad good. Fuck off. Put something good on, call it as good. That’s a commentator’s job. You’re either young or stupid, but you don’t understand the subject matter, that much is evident.

JR is not going bury AEW by selling such “over” acts as Riho and The Dark Order. Nah, bye bye.



imthegame19 said:


> Haha yes I was dismantled if it was 1990. Thanks again for sharing your crappy opinion. Like I said I'm done trying to have actual conversation with you. Sadly you are so bias against the company and clearly have agenda and rooting for it to fail. Someone so closed minded like you isnt worth my time. You already made up your mind and just pushing negativity repeating yourself every day. The sad part is you don't even realize it.


Yes, because people are going to stick around for TV shows with a bunch of bullshit in them in 2020. Very modern of you. And of course it is my opinion that the whole show matters in an era of declining television that makes me outdated. 



DOTL said:


> It seems weird to me, but on one hand we have people saying "we need to protect kayfabe by making things more realistic" but then on the other hand they say "adhering to any kind of systemic ranking system is bad." This is funny because the fact that people challenge people without proper motivation is one of the least realistic things modern wrestling and the biggest reason, I think, no one is willing to suspend disbelief for it.
> 
> One of the things I hate most about "sports entertainment" is that it rarely feels like a sport or entertaining. The angles are never logical because there's no systemic reason to justify the booking, or no way to hold that booking accountable. Doing semi-athletic crap doesn't make something a sport. The element of structured competition does. Wrestlers lacking motivation doesn't make anything entertaining. Giving them a motivation that everyone can easily understand is. And the gold isn't proper motivation. Why? because only the guy getting pushed ever wants it. All the other cats are content with fighting each other for no reason.
> 
> ...


People who can’t understand why a win-loss record might be bad, but sports presentation is good, are exactly the kind of polar thinkers sinking wrestling heading into 2020. The AEW fan base, ladies and gentlemen.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

Tbf the Win Loss shit does need to go.
It should Be used sporadically for storylines. Not something permanent. Like Takers streak or Umagas streak. They could’ve done something with Omegas losing streak but they pussied out on it.


----------



## JBLGOAT (Mar 24, 2014)

optikk sucks said:


> Tbf the Win Loss shit does need to go.
> It should Be used sporadically for storylines. Not something permanent. Like Takers streak or Umagas streak. They could’ve done something with Omegas losing streak but they pussied out on it.


My issue is they have the win/loss records but they don't do anything to capitalize off the win loss/records. No one is really benefiting from the win/loss records as they are not protecting them by brining in jobbers and temporary talent. If wrestling was real and win/loss records counted no one would want to be in multi-man matches. In a four way there are 3 losers and one winner.

There is usually one match on AEW dark that is totally pointless and just to get people on the card. Usually it's a six man match but there are other variations. They can get rid of this match and replace with one match where a guy beats a jobber/temporary talent. Either Brandon Cutler and QT Marshall and Peter Avalon win against guys coming in or they should be cut.

I absolutely do not want them to get rid of win/loss records. I hate reboots and any changes should have the appearance of being organic.


----------



## qntntgood (Mar 12, 2010)

At this point I'm starting to agree with russo,aew needs to get the dirt sheets and the Mark's away from their product.because right now, they are looking at a rebuild.they need some more veteran,leadership in creative.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

The Wood said:


> That is long, and you are not as interesting as me to read, so I won’t. I got as far as you proclaiming to speak for the wrestling industry. You don’t.
> 
> A commentator’s job isn’t spin. That’s the real bullshit. That’s what you’re trying to assign to the guy. Make something bad good. Fuck off. Put something good on, call it as good. That’s a commentator’s job. You’re either young or stupid, but
> 
> ...


What doesn't make you modern is you don't know what bullshit is and isn't. Anyone calling Janela matches with Omega and Moxley as bullshit. Shows how out of touch you and some others are. You guys just run your mouths because you don't like someone. Without how those matches do in ratings or YouTube views etc. 


Or 1990s view of job guys vs how it's done today in wrestling. When fans are smart and know what job guy is or isn't and just wanna see their favorite get a dominant win. It doesn't matter if job guy is 6'2 300 pounds or 5'7 160 if they lose in 1 to 3 minutes every week.Again you aren't worth my time.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> The thing is everything you're saying doesn't need a W-L record to make it happen. You just need to book with common sense for whatever story you're trying to tell. You don't need an official record to tell the story that someone is tired of losing matches or that they joined with someone to get ahead. Wrestling has been telling those stories for ages without W-L records. The fact they have a W-L record isn't a problem, it's just imo a stupid addition to the product.


Fair enough. I just like the WL record because the frame of the story isn't abstract.It isn't malleable, and it puts the bookers in a position to have some sort of constraints on the type of stories they can tell. Constraints that fall in line with something even a person who hasn't watched the show can understand. When everything leans on the soap opera style booking there's no reason for a guy new to the company not to jump to the front of the line. To me, it's the same to me as the fake in-ring rules. Why are they there? They provide structure to a match that, theoretically, can go any way the wrestlers are physically capable of performing. Arguing that WL is a stupid addition is like arguing that 5 counts on the ropes, rope breaks, pins, or what have you are stupid additions to the fake fight. Maybe you dislike the rule itself, but the idea of structural accountability is not something you should throw away just because the "no closed fist rule" might sound retarded to you. It's something you try to exploit for maximum psychological effect. Disregard for systemic structure is why chair shots meant something in the past and they don't mean crap now.



> As far as sports entertainment goes, that's just what wrestling is. You don't like how WWE books that's valid, but a W-L record isn't some fix. Good logical booking is all they needed. Noting wins and losses is fine when that's a part of a storyline, but as a system it's goofy as hell.


No. That's how WWE's brand of "wrestling" is. Old school wrestling had more systematic structure than what we've been exposed to over the past 20 years. It wasn't always a WL thing, but it was there in the form of conditional titles, tournaments, stipulations, both kayfabe and shoot governing bodies, inter-promotional competition, what have you. How else would people believe this crap if there was no structure at all? Now it's just one guy who isn't held accountable to anyone making decisions, and reads just like that. That's the death of kayfabe, right there. No stakes. No statistical pressure. No tangible reason to care. No default psychology. You may not like WL records, but you cannot deny that the lack of meaningful stakes is a big issue in wrestling. Sure you can "book logically" but what's keeping you there if something as simple as personal taste or a bad prediction can alter it? Structure holds you to your decisions. If the booker can't work around that, maybe they aren't a good booker.



> The other suggestion you had is just overly convoluted for no reason. The fact you feel the need to do all of that just furthers how unnecessary all that is. Just book logically, no need to tell us stuff like "oh Page is 25-10 in singles this year".


Any more convoluted than the NFL? Those jackasses change the rules literally every season, they put more numbers on the screen than the Matrix, and yet it's more over than WWE ever dreams to be. AEW's system is incomplete. But it's incompleteness isn't an argument for why it should be done away with.




The Wood said:


> That is long, and you are not as interesting as me to read, so I won’t. I got as far as you proclaiming to speak for the wrestling industry. You don’t.


Facts are often dry. BS can be quite entertaining. Your BS wasn't half as entertaining as you think it was. It was a slog, and friken repetitive.

I didn't say I speak for the industry. You're just making up more bullshit so you can disregard what I actually said because you're flippin lazy.



> A commentator’s job isn’t spin. That’s the real bullshit. That’s what you’re trying to assign to the guy. Make something bad good. Fuck off. Put something good on, call it as good. That’s a commentator’s job. You’re either young or stupid, but you don’t understand the subject matter, that much is evident.


You cling to those ad hominem attacks because your argument isn't worth a damn and you know it. It's ironic you call me a young or stupid because that's how the stupid and children argue.Once again, get some self-awareness.

I didn't say the commentators job is to make bad things good. I said his job is to SELL. If you were half as interested in understanding what people are saying as oppose to failing to make yourself look superior, you'd grasp THAT simple concept. And when I say sell, I mean literally. T_Shirts, Tickets, hair pieces, the act. Whatever the company needs to push. Selling means you don't unnecessarily poke holes in the product in front of everybody because of your own personal biases, and you keep your mouth shut when you can't possibly salvage something. Selling means you focus on the good and not the bad. Ironically, this is something JR has done in the many times in the past and even on this show with some horsecrap creative. Why are you bending over backwards to change his job definition, a job definition EVERYBODY KNOWS is true? Is it because your argument depends on it?

Yes. The answer is yes.



> JR is not going bury AEW by selling such “over” acts as Riho and The Dark Order. Nah, bye bye.


I never said the Dark Order was over. That doesn't feature in anything I wrote. And Riho is over. Ratings rise when she sows up. I'm not making this crap up. JR burying her on commentary isn't stopping her from drawing. And his not liking a small women's champion doesn't change the fact that someone in the audience likes her. How is bury her despite all this helping AEW?



> People who can’t understand why a win-loss record might be bad, but sports presentation is good, are exactly the kind of polar thinkers sinking wrestling heading into 2020. The AEW fan base, ladies and gentlemen.


It's not an issue of not understanding. It's an issue of simply disagreeing. A concept you show no evidence of being able to comprehend.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> Fair enough. I just like the WL record because the frame of the story isn't abstract.It isn't malleable, and it puts the bookers in a position to have some sort of constraints on the type of stories they can tell. Constraints that fall in line with something even a person who hasn't watched the show can understand. When everything leans on the soap opera style booking there's no reason for a guy new to the company not to jump to the front of the line. To me, it's the same to me as the fake in-ring rules. Why are they there? They provide structure to a match that, theoretically, can go any way the wrestlers are physically capable of performing. Arguing that WL is a stupid addition is like arguing that 5 counts on the ropes, rope breaks, pins, or what have you are stupid additions to the fake fight. Maybe you dislike the rule itself, but the idea of structural accountability is not something you should throw away just because the "no closed fist rule" might sound retarded to you. It's something you try to exploit for maximum psychological effect. Disregard for systemic structure is why chair shots meant something in the past and they don't mean crap now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1. I'm not saying that rules and constraints aren't necessary. I'm saying you can have that without an official W-L record. Plenty of promotions have been able to accomplish logical booking without a W-L record. You don't need a W-L record to show that Moxley and Omega are clearly top guys. That's what pushes and commentators putting them over is for. You didn't need a W-L record to know someone like Mideon was a loser, the fact he consistently loss let you know he was a loser. The fact they have to reset records just shows it's a silly constraint. 

2. You're too focused on what you don't like about WWE. The truth is since being on TV wrestling has been a story driven medium that uses a "sport" background as the universe set up which is why it's all sports entertainment. 

Wrestling has been around longer than both of us and people have understood it without needing a W-L record. All of what you're saying is treating viewers way too stupid. You can have structure, logic, and all those things you want with out a W-L record we both know that. Just because WWE has shaky booking doesn't mean that AEW would have shaky booking without this added addition. 

As far as an official record adding stakes it does, but not really. It's kind of artificial. Like I don't need a number involved to know a match between two top people is important. Though I definitely get you to some degree. 

3. Its needlessly complicating something that didn't need to be complicated. Wrestling didn't need an official W-L record to be understandable. It should be thrown away because it's not needed.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. I'm not saying that rules and constraints aren't necessary. I'm saying you can have that without an official W-L record. Plenty of promotions have been able to accomplish logical booking without a W-L record. You don't need a W-L record to show that Moxley and Omega are clearly top guys. That's what pushes and commentators putting them over is for. You didn't need a W-L record to know someone like Mideon was a loser, the fact he consistently loss let you know he was a loser. The fact they have to reset records just shows it's a silly constraint.
> 
> 2. You're too focused on what you don't like about WWE. The truth is since being on TV wrestling has been a story driven medium that uses a "sport" background as the universe set up which is why it's all sports entertainment.
> 
> ...



1. I think you misunderstand the point of the record. It isn't there to illustrate who's a winner and who's a loser. it helps make that easier, but the main point is to provide intuitive justification for match making and provides psychology that simply isn't possible when a loss has no systemic consequence. You're right, you didn't say constraints and rules are unnecessary, but I do believe that doing way with this system will soften the competitive landscape in a way similar to if there were no constraints at all.

The reset isn't an indication that a WL is a bad constraint. The reset is a natural consequence of there being matches every week. The reason a boxer has a career record is because a boxer doesn't have matches more than 50 times a year. Wrestlers, on the other hand, just might.

2. I focus on WWE because I think WWE's unchallenged exposure has biased the wrestling fan against potentially better ways of match making when it's own method is bleeding the entire industry much worse than some prospective fixes have. I think its a mistake to assume the issue with WWE is merely in its booking and not in its general philosophy as a whole. Soap Opera booking is a product of WWF's philosophy, and not a universal trait of wrestling.

You're right about wrestling being around longer than both of us, and working without a W-L record (at least not a universal one). But there was once a time when people thought it was real and it was built to look like it was real. That's a moot point now. The cat's out of the bag.

It's not about what the audience knows or doesn't know. it's about kayfabe justification for the organization's existence, their matches, and their championship. It makes no sense to me for an industry dependent on suspension of disbelief, we have to buy the notion that people are working for a company to put on fights, not to win prestige,to build a tangible legacy, or even money, but because some nebulous authority standing in for the real life booker says they need to fight for some reason. That's why in WWE every feud involves 18 different combinations of the same match. It's bizarre. it's stupid, and it's the result of matches having no structural reason to exist. Why on God's green earth does the fact that two guys are feuding preclude them from fighting other guys? Why does a wrestler's temperament mean he always has to fight wrestlers with the opposite temperament? Why is the match schedule not something we can know a month in advance, hold in our hand, and speculate about?

It makes no sense.

An official record is an imperfect step in the right direction.

3. I don't see it as needlessly complicated. I see it as adding structure where no such structure ever existed. If you can trust people to understand and care why wrestler A hates wrestler B and has to fight him 5 times a month for that reason alone, you can explain why this guy gets to wrestle the champ after a winning streak. Heck, I'd say the latter is easier to explain because it is intuitive enough not to require setup every week.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

Getting a little feisty in here....I better go tell the mods.....just kidding, there's some good discussion going on.

I have always been lukewarm on the W/L records idea. I think it has a little elbow room to be a good storytelling piece IF done just right but I think it also has a lot of room for error as @RapShepard has often stated. I'm kind of on a wait and see stance right now. I'll see how it goes half way through 2020 to see if I think the idea needs scrapped completely or not. I see and understand the pro records people and the con records people. Both sides make a good case.

As far as the commentary thing that is being argued. I'm kind of inbetween on that one too. The job of the commentator is to sell the matches and promotion and the fact that JR is not doing all that well in that front I would consider unprofessional HOWEVER, a commentator also has to come across legit and not insult the intelligence of the audience and if he tried to sell some of that stuff as gold people would look at him like a tool and he would loose respect, on that front I think he is being real.

Conclusion. JR is being unprofessional but he is also trying to be legit and not insult the fans intelligence. Solution? JR and Khan and the EVP's need to have a round table and discuss a direction for JR and JR needs to pipe in and be adamant about not calling stupid stuff and trying to sell it like it's gold. Overall I think they are both at fault here and they need to get all this hashed out. Another possible solution is to have JR backstage doing executive type work and leave the commentating to Shiavone, Golden Boy, and Excalibur.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. I think you misunderstand the point of the record. It isn't there to illustrate who's a winner and who's a loser. it helps make that easier, but the main point is to provide intuitive justification for match making and provides psychology that simply isn't possible when a loss has no systemic consequence. You're right, you didn't say constraints and rules are unnecessary, but I do believe that doing way with this system will soften the competitive landscape in a way similar to if there were no constraints at all.
> 
> The reset isn't an indication that a WL is a bad constraint. The reset is a natural consequence of there being matches every week. The reason a boxer has a career record is because a boxer doesn't have matches more than 50 times a year. Wrestlers, on the other hand, just might.
> 
> ...


1. I understand it, I'm just pointing out the obvious flaws in it that are unnecessary. You don't need any of these to do logical match ups. The fact that they wrestle so much is the main reason why they don't need a W-L record. They're resetting the records because they know eventually it's going to look stupid when eventually some former jobber takes off and they'd have to mention some shit like "he's 20-70". 

2. But on the same token none of this is keeping AEW from running into similar problems as AEW. I mean how many times have we seen the Buck's and Lucha Bros in a match of some sort. 

As far as feuds go I'd say that's honestly been one of the weaker parts of AEW. Outside of Cody who's been having interesting feuds? That's not even getting into the fact they're doing feuds that are too short or don't get enough story added to it. ARE isn't really being helped by having so much going on. I mean think about Kenny is apparently having a crisis over choking, having turmoil with Page, and feuding with PAC. But it really just feels like he's doing much of nothing. 

3. The thing is you don't need this structure to avoid WWE mistakes. Just avoid doing WWE mistakes, you don't need a W-L record to avoid WWE mistakes.


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

AEW needs to make investments in the right talents. They lost out on Jacob Fatu, Alex Hammerstone, Eli Drake, Harry Smith & Marshall Von Erich. They will also likely miss out on Brian Cage as well. Right now, Tony Khan needs to back up a brinks truck to the home of Killer Kross and pray he signs cause he has the potential to be a needle mover who has no prior relationship with the WWE.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Dondada78 said:


> AEW needs to make investments in the right talents. They lost out on Jacob Fatu, Alex Hammerstone, Eli Drake, Harry Smith & Marshall Von Erich. They will also likely miss out on Brian Cage as well. Right now, Tony Khan needs to back up a brinks truck to the home of Killer Kross and pray he signs cause he has the potential to be a needle mover who has no prior relationship with the WWE.


Ahh no. They have Chris Jericho, Jon Moxley, Cody Rhodes, Kenny Omega, Adam Page, Pac, MJF, Jake Hager. With young guys with upside like Darby Allin, Sammy Guevara, Jack Perry etc.


They have plenty of talent for ONE TWO show. Would few of those guys be a nice addition to the roster? Sure, but we're talking about guys who would be midcarders in AEW still. Should they try to sign Killer Kross?


YES but throwing huge money at him would be a mistake. Hes not difference maker. If he wants to come to AEW. It shouldn't be about getting biggest check. More creative freedom, lighter schedule and good paying contract is enough to offer him.

If he doesnt want to come you know big men in Luke Harper or Ryback will be dying to come to AEW soon. As would veteran like Matt Hardy and Marty Schrull is still out there as well. They only have enough room to add maybe 2 or 3 guys. Roster is already crowded for a two hour show.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

imthegame19 said:


> If he doesnt want to come you know big men in Luke Harper or Ryback will be dying to come to AEW soon. As would veteran like Matt Hardy and Marty Schrull is still out there as well.


I'd like to see evidence of this, I remember months ago "TONS OF WWE TALENT CAN'T WAIT TO JUMP!" and so far they've all re-signed with WWE.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

reyfan said:


> I'd like to see evidence of this, I remember months ago "TONS OF WWE TALENT CAN'T WAIT TO JUMP!" and so far they've all re-signed with WWE.


AJ Styles, Gallows/Anderson, Nakumara, Usos, Mike Kanellis, Randy Orton resigned who were actually set to be Free agents. Jon Moxley, Dustin Rhodes and Shawn Spears left for AEW(they also got Santana/Ortiz from TNA/Impact). Really out of the guys who resigned with WWE only Gallows/Anderson surprised me. Everyone else was always expected to stay. 


Remember Jericho said from day 1. That they only wanted some select guys from WWE. So who knows how many of those guys that resigned AEW actually wanted. 


That said we are seeing more guys leaving. They finally let Luke Harper go after he wouldn't resign and 90 days no compete clause ends around the time his around the time his contract would have ended anyways. So they finally released him.

While Matt Hardy has pretty much said he's leaving and they are jobbing him out on his way out. Just like they did Moxley. So Harper already a goner and Hardy on the way. Not to mention theres no way Ryback going back to WWE. Hes pretty much kissing up to Cody and AEW. Hoping they will want to sign him when he's ready to wrestle again soon.


The other guys we know are free agents this year is Rey Mysterio and the Revival. I think Rey staying to be close to his son. While Revival could go either way. I don't think they will ever be fully happy in WWE but big money might be tempting for them to stay.


Unlike say Moxley they haven't made millions and might not have comfortable life he has where they could turn down such big money. WWE is adding more time to Jeff Hardy deal to keep him around. But he should still be a Free agent in 2020 at some point. I'm not sure if AEW would want him given issues he has.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. I understand it, I'm just pointing out the obvious flaws in it that are unnecessary. You don't need any of these to do logical match ups. The fact that they wrestle so much is the main reason why they don't need a W-L record. They're resetting the records because they know eventually it's going to look stupid when eventually some former jobber takes off and they'd have to mention some shit like "he's 20-70".
> 
> 2. But on the same token none of this is keeping AEW from running into similar problems as AEW. I mean how many times have we seen the Buck's and Lucha Bros in a match of some sort.
> 
> ...


1. I agree that you don't need them to do logical match ups. But where I disagree is that logical booking supersedes any system structure at all. Logical booking has its limits, and much of the stress in booking is, I personally believe, the result of having a flimsy kayfabe motivation for the wrestlers wrestling in the first place. It baffles me that we talk about this being a story, but all the wrestlers', from jobbers to blue-chippers, primary reason for being there is "I work for this promotion and wrestle for no reason until someone pisses me off." Story telling 101 states that character needs motivation. With a WL stat, you can assume for a wrestler, even the ones you're not using, with a basic goal. This way, even guys not in a title running can have something to shoot for. "I can't win this season, but I want to finish undefeated." "Can I finally get a win on the board?" "Wow. I drew in an otherwise perfect losing streak. There is hope." That type of psychology is intuitive, and is only possible in a world where records exist(whether you write them down or not). Without it, it's "this guy is a simple jobber."

And you're right about it looking silly for a winner having a 20-70 record. But just like the NFL, losing teams have been known to come off of skunked seasons and go to the Superbowl. This would not be possible if the teams' overall record mattered. Look at tennis. They have records for each tournament, and then overall records that don't matter as much. Real sport already has an answer for why things ware wiped clean and it doesn't have to do with "because record keeping is silly." The reason records restart because each tournament, season, or whatever is a new competitive field.A new meta-game, if you will.

2 Bucks and Lucho Bros do wrestle a lot, but at least part of that has to do with the size of their roster. The other part is justified by their ranking. At the end of the day, teams contending for a spot make more sense to be facing each other more often than "they're fighting 80 times a week because this guy stole this guy's wife." ehem.

Kenny isn't feuding consistently, sure, but he still feels like a big deal. I think that's possible because a W-L record is easier to summarize as a bit of bad luck than a nebulous pall of "this guy is booked to lose for reasons." It's much harder to pin a guy as a loser if, even after three back to back loses, he still has more victories. When wins are loses are in the ether, you can only judge a guy by his most recent victory. I think, if Kenny didn't have his record to fall back on, he'd seem even more rudderless, not less.

3. It's not just about WWE's mistakes. It's about bringing something to wrestling that isn't qualified by the template WWE has put forth. I thought that was the point of AEW. I think WL is an experiment that needs more exploration and tweaking..


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

I think if AEW really wants to be a alternative. With more sports concept and less soap opera or crash tv stuff. Well they really need to go all in on the concept. Keeping track of records and top 5 ranking system isn't enough.

People who are fans of NFL or NBA or MLB. There's plenty of stories and build up around these games. You can do the same thing in wrestling and tell us a story and why the match matter.


For that to work they need bigger ranking systems for male, female and tag. Which they can use it almost like standings are in sports. I would do male world title rankings/standings, male mid card ranking/standings. So you got rankings of say 6 guys as world title contenders.


Then you got ranking of 6 mid card contenders. With guys capable of moving onto main event contender list or dropping mid card contender list. Which can tell plenty of stories and set up plenty of drama.


Also like with sports there is video package or story before the match. Or promos or build up to these matches to tell audience why it's such a big deal. Then we can even see post match reaction of joy after big win. Or disappointment after a big loss and how the different characters react to this.


Obviously I'm just split balling some of these ideas right now. But it's basically putting wrestling in professional sports everyday storylines. Who knows if it will work but this is different and would make AEW alternative for sure.


If AEW wants to be different. I just think they need to do more. Then just have clean finishes, top 5 ranking and longer matches.


They gotta develop stories and system to really do that. It seems to me they want to be regular wrestling show. But add some small new concepts, non-scripted promos and do things in-ring wise(longer matches, clean finishes, making tag team wrestling matter more etc) better then WWE doing. With obviously less soap opera type storylines. Which could work but I'm sure that's enough to make them stand out as something totally different. I guess only time will tell.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

imthegame19 said:


> AJ Styles, Gallows/Anderson, Nakumara, Usos, Mike Kanellis, Randy Orton resigned who were actually set to be Free agents. Jon Moxley, Dustin Rhodes and Shawn Spears left for AEW(they also got Santana/Ortiz from TNA/Impact). Really out of the guys who resigned with WWE only Gallows/Anderson surprised me. Everyone else was always expected to stay.
> 
> 
> Remember Jericho said from day 1. That they only wanted some select guys from WWE. So who knows how many of those guys that resigned AEW actually wanted.
> ...


I understand about the Revival, but I remember months ago "only 40% of the roster has been announced, more coming soon!" and all they have gotten was Jack Swagger and the Butcher/Blade tag-team, I think alot of the wrestlers being keen to jump is in alot of fans heads and no where else.


----------



## Benoit's Weight Machine (Dec 28, 2019)

BigCy said:


> As far as the commentary thing that is being argued. I'm kind of inbetween on that one too. The job of the commentator is to sell the matches and promotion and the fact that JR is not doing all that well in that front I would consider unprofessional HOWEVER, a commentator also has to come across legit and not insult the intelligence of the audience and if he tried to sell some of that stuff as gold people would look at him like a tool and he would loose respect, on that front I think he is being real.
> 
> Conclusion. JR is being unprofessional but he is also trying to be legit and not insult the fans intelligence. Solution? JR and Khan and the EVP's need to have a round table and discuss a direction for JR and JR needs to pipe in and be adamant about not calling stupid stuff and trying to sell it like it's gold. Overall I think they are both at fault here and they need to get all this hashed out. Another possible solution is to have JR backstage doing executive type work and leave the commentating to Shiavone, Golden Boy, and Excalibur.


Agree wholeheartedly as far as JR. He did this in WWF as well. Remember his reactions when calling TL Hopper or Naked Mideon? The problem now is that it's starting to become distracting and he is burying people who are actually over such as Riho. His indifference to the butcher and the blade also inadvertently buries them. 

I think another factor is his age. Old people just say whatever the fuck they want with little care or regard. This actually is a good thing in professional wrestling as shoot comments get people talking. Perhaps they can harness this in a beneficial way? I actually enjoy hearing JRs voice due to nostalgia so I'm not inclined to remove him just yet but perhaps Tony can take more of a lead during certain matches? In any event, they need to be utilizing JR much better. He is so much more than just an announcer. He was essentially second in command of two hot territories (UWF/Mid-south in the 80s and WWF during the attitude era) and has so much experience to draw upon.

On the subject of commentary, this is an unpopular opinion but I do not like Excalibur. He's got potential but he really needs to increase his vocabulary. He also needs to learn the difference between a tope and a plancha. Also, he needs to stop saying that someone is "on roller skates" every few minutes.


----------



## nailz1 (Sep 12, 2012)

Ultimately I think it comes down to the roster. Sure you have guys like Jericho, Moxley and Pac, But the underneath talent that have been brought in like the Dark order, Brandon Cutler and Joey Janela are just not good enough and mostly seem to have brought in because there friends with the bucks. The women's division is even worse and in my opinion and if AEW could not find any better Female Wrestlers, then I think they should not have had a Women's division to start with.


----------



## Chip Chipperson (Jun 29, 2019)

imthegame19 said:


> Ahh no. They have Chris Jericho, Jon Moxley, Cody Rhodes, Kenny Omega, Adam Page, Pac, MJF, Jake Hager. With young guys with upside like Darby Allin, Sammy Guevara, Jack Perry etc.
> 
> 
> They have plenty of talent for ONE TWO show. Would few of those guys be a nice addition to the roster? Sure, but we're talking about guys who would be midcarders in AEW still. Should they try to sign Killer Kross?
> ...


Man oh man. No disrespect but you don't know much about wrestling if you think Darby Allin, Jack Perry and Sammy Guevara have upside. The average AEW fan is bigger than Allin and Perry whilst Guevara looks a little bit better but still no better than your average high school or college athlete. Nobody outside of a smark fanbase cares about Omega or Page either.

AEW's only truly recognisable wrestlers are Jericho (Admittedly a huge star), Cody Rhodes (A WWE midcard act at best although he did deserve better there), Moxley (A star for WWE but never a huge one) and Jake Hager (Who struggled to get over and do business).

Kross isn't a difference maker but neither is Luke Harper or Ryback. Admittedly they're better than the jabronis that AEW have in the midcard now but I think AEW needs at least someone on Jericho's level to make a difference to their rating.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. I agree that you don't need them to do logical match ups. But where I disagree is that logical booking supersedes any system structure at all. Logical booking has its limits, and much of the stress in booking is, I personally believe, the result of having a flimsy kayfabe motivation for the wrestlers wrestling in the first place. It baffles me that we talk about this being a story, but all the wrestlers', from jobbers to blue-chippers, primary reason for being there is "I work for this promotion and wrestle for no reason until someone pisses me off." Story telling 101 states that character needs motivation. With a WL stat, you can assume for a wrestler, even the ones you're not using, with a basic goal. This way, even guys not in a title running can have something to shoot for. "I can't win this season, but I want to finish undefeated." "Can I finally get a win on the board?" "Wow. I drew in an otherwise perfect losing streak. There is hope." That type of psychology is intuitive, and is only possible in a world where records exist(whether you write them down or not). Without it, it's "this guy is a simple jobber."
> 
> And you're right about it looking silly for a winner having a 20-70 record. But just like the NFL, losing teams have been known to come off of skunked seasons and go to the Superbowl. This would not be possible if the teams' overall record mattered. Look at tennis. They have records for each tournament, and then overall records that don't matter as much. Real sport already has an answer for why things ware wiped clean and it doesn't have to do with "because record keeping is silly." The reason records restart because each tournament, season, or whatever is a new competitive field.A new meta-game, if you will.
> 
> ...


1. The thing is what you keep saying as far as the motivation an official W-L goes, all of them still boil down to "I want to win because I don't want to be a loser". Which is a common sense bare minimum motivation regardless. 


But this trying to do a new season to wipe things clean doesn't translate well. In regular sports the seasons ends because they've crowned the champion and are taking a couple month breaks. In that break you get things like retirements, free agency, and a draft. A team in team sports can look vastly different from the end of one season to the beginning of the next. Without that structure of regular season then playoffs to determine this seasons champion a record reset just looks weird. 

2. No it doesn't make any more sense. It just highlights the fact that regardless of structure added in wrestling people are going to wrestle amongst their level. Main eventers will spend most of their time against main eventers, midcarders against midcarders, low card vs low card. 

As far as Omega feeling bigger is help from the W-L record I'd say no it's from common sense. You never needed a ranking to understand that late 90s Taker was a top guy, even if he wasn't Stone Cold. 

3. If AEW is doing things simply just because they want to not look like WWE that's silly. It's even sillier when shit like "Well yeah Pac beat Hangman and Omega, but Darby beat Cima on Dark and tied with Cody so he's the title contender" happens. Or Scorpio Sky pins Jericho in a tag match the Rabbit Season Duck Seasons his way to a title shot.


----------



## Dondada78 (Jun 10, 2019)

imthegame19 said:


> Ahh no. They have Chris Jericho, Jon Moxley, Cody Rhodes, Kenny Omega, Adam Page, Pac, MJF, Jake Hager. With young guys with upside like Darby Allin, Sammy Guevara, Jack Perry etc.
> 
> 
> They have plenty of talent for ONE TWO show. Would few of those guys be a nice addition to the roster? Sure, but we're talking about guys who would be midcarders in AEW still. Should they try to sign Killer Kross?
> ...


Killer Kross is better than all the guys you just mentioned. Killer Kross has Hollywood villain appeal that just needs the right platform and push. He has the promos, the voice, the aura and wrestling ability to be the BIGGEST star in AEW. Think Goldberg level appeal as a heel if handled right. No more goofy shit like with Chris Jericho but a real menacing heel. We already know what Luke Harper is and what's his ceiling. Marty Scurll is a vanilla midget who reinvented himself and had a brilliant gimmick but BTE kinda killed the aura and turned him into a goof.

Ryback could be something but can't be called Ryback. He's a big body which is desperately needed but not a needle mover.

I still think AEW needs to get MVP and pair him with Locked n Loaded. Sign Edge Stone before he becomes their next big missed opportunity. Sign Bill Collier before the E does. Sign Lokomotiv Ivan Markov before the WWE discovers him.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Chip Chipperson said:


> Man oh man. No disrespect but you don't know much about wrestling if you think Darby Allin, Jack Perry and Sammy Guevara have upside. The average AEW fan is bigger than Allin and Perry whilst Guevara looks a little bit better but still no better than your average high school or college athlete. Nobody outside of a smark fanbase cares about Omega or Page either.
> 
> AEW's only truly recognisable wrestlers are Jericho (Admittedly a huge star), Cody Rhodes (A WWE midcard act at best although he did deserve better there), Moxley (A star for WWE but never a huge one) and Jake Hager (Who struggled to get over and do business).
> 
> Kross isn't a difference maker but neither is Luke Harper or Ryback. Admittedly they're better than the jabronis that AEW have in the midcard now but I think AEW needs at least someone on Jericho's level to make a difference to their rating.


Darby Allin, Sammy Guevara and Jack Perry have gotten big praise from wrestlers and insiders etc. Many view them as future stars and i heard this multiple times from different people. I personally see upside in a few others too but haven't heard praise so I didn't mention them. If your reason is their too small.

Well I can't talk with conversation with someone living in 1990s. We already see someone as thin as Adam Cole and as tiny as Johnny Gargano are top guys in NXT. With Daniel Bryan who's really like 5'8 and 180 points can main event Wrestlemania. Well I don't want to hear anyone on AEW roster is too small besides Marko Stunt.

Omega and Page are great talents. Which is also why WWE wanted them badly. AEW been on tv for 3 months nobody is suppose to view Omega as equal to AJ Styles or Adam Page equal to Seth Rollins already.


We already saw all the big names on Jericho level in Kurt Angle, Sting, Mick Foley etc all in TNA at once. It didn't make huge difference in the ratings. You need to make Moxley into huge star. You gotta make Omega, Page and MJF into stars. Creating own talent or repackaging guys from other companies is how you create stars. That's not going to happen overnight so fans need to be patient.


Any older wrestler outside of maybe John Cena. Would give rating spikes for a few weeks and then it would go back to normal. Right now if you look at the ratings and YouTube views. Jon Moxley is their biggest draw even more then Jericho. So they really need to push him as the top guy and I think they are about to.


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

Dondada78 said:


> Killer Kross is better than all the guys you just mentioned. Killer Kross has Hollywood villain appeal that just needs the right platform and push. He has the promos, the voice, the aura and wrestling ability to be the BIGGEST star in AEW. Think Goldberg level appeal as a heel if handled right. No more goofy shit like with Chris Jericho but a real menacing heel. We already know what Luke Harper is and what's his ceiling. Marty Scurll is a vanilla midget who reinvented himself and had a brilliant gimmick but BTE kinda killed the aura and turned him into a goof.
> 
> Ryback could be something but can't be called Ryback. He's a big body which is desperately needed but not a needle mover.
> 
> I still think AEW needs to get MVP and pair him with Locked n Loaded. Sign Edge Stone before he becomes their next big missed opportunity. Sign Bill Collier before the E does. Sign Lokomotiv Ivan Markov before the WWE discovers him.



I like Kross and hope AEW gets him. Because I think WWE might ruin him. But I don't think he's gonna be this mega star either that you throw big money at. There a lot of other guys you can repackage and turn to menacing big men heels. Kross while very talented isn't going to just come and ratings jump to 1.2 or 1.4 because of him. So I'd offer him a good contract but not get in bidding war with WWE.


AEW having success right now paying down their debt. Because they didn't go crazy throwing big money around. 4 to 6 guys are paid well. While rest of the roster is pretty cheap. Yes per show or days work it's good deal for the talent still. My point is if they start throwing huge money at guys. Well all of the sudden you need better ratings for more ad revenue, need to sell more tickets and do more ppv buys. If whoever they bring in isn't going to bring in more then he cost. Then you don't throw big money at people. You offer them more creative freedom, lighter schedule etc and still good money but that's it.


As for Ryback he's still working on the name and trademark. His lawyers are telling him he should win and get the name. It's just gonna cost him thousands of dollars. I think he's probably close enough health wise to return now. But is waiting to get this name first.


----------



## bcbud3 (Aug 17, 2010)

One spot that is a large problem for me is the lack of quality matches. These guys film one show a week correct? That leaves 6 days free. These guys should be in the ring planning, practicing, running through their matches every day. When the tapings hit, there should be NO botches. There have been SO many botches, missteps, poorly timed moves that makes these guys look minor league.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

bcbud3 said:


> One spot that is a large problem for me is the lack of quality matches. These guys film one show a week correct? That leaves 6 days free. These guys should be in the ring planning, practicing, running through their matches every day. When the tapings hit, there should be NO botches. There have been SO many botches, missteps, poorly timed moves that makes these guys look minor league.


I think part of the problem is they want to be a work place where no one is being "forced" to work too much. This sounds great on paper and in concept it gives the workers more rest but it also has a negative side in that it becomes more of a part time type of thing where no one takes it too seriously and people can just miss shows without any repurcussion. As you stated, it also makes the workers complacent and they wing it when they could all get together the day before and have a "practice" day where they all get together and tighten that stuff up.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. The thing is what you keep saying as far as the motivation an official W-L goes, all of them still boil down to "I want to win because I don't want to be a loser". Which is a common sense bare minimum motivation regardless.
> 
> 
> But this trying to do a new season to wipe things clean doesn't translate well. In regular sports the seasons ends because they've crowned the champion and are taking a couple month breaks. In that break you get things like retirements, free agency, and a draft. A team in team sports can look vastly different from the end of one season to the beginning of the next. Without that structure of regular season then playoffs to determine this seasons champion a record reset just looks weird.
> ...


1. Yes. But it's not specific. There's a big yet subtle difference between "I'm a loser and I want to win" compared to "I lost 5 times in a row and is now one loss away from having a losing record." The difference comes down to the nebulous versus the concrete. The latter motivation is one that can be played around with and can be used to make one loser look different from another. If this is about the story as we all claim that it is, then why should everyone in the lower card have a default situation so generic? Keeping W-Ls a vague sense invites nothing but vague context. In real sports, there is always a search for a narrative, and that narrative starts from the personal and specific situation of each team. You can't have a specific situation for each team if there's no record of what they've done. This is true if you write down wins and losses or not.

Breaks and personnel changes are a natural benefit of having a season in sports, but I would argue this is just a small sliver of the true reason we have them. The real reason seasons crop up a lot is that human, and even animal behavior is characterized by a type of environmental efficiency. Everything from school and TV to bird migration is in accordance to this seasonal rhythm because complex life is are more efficient when it does different things at different times of the year.

The weirdness is the same for wrestling for this reason. So much so that even WWE has a vague sort of structure around their 5 big ppvs, ending with a wipe of old feuds and a draft. So I don't understand how leaning into a yearly re-contextualization because of a record changes is any different.

Think about it. if the reason we have seasons is for the overall benefit of doing different things at different times of the year, wouldn't it make sense for this to be built into a year-round show? Yes wrestling is scripted, but burnout is real for both the wrestlers and the viewers. Even just a kayfabe clean slate would make fans excited for next year. But without a W-L record you'll never get a real sense that the competitive landscape has been completely renewed, and a season becomes a useless branding thing.

2.The difference is that a record defines the high, mid, and low card. No longer would that be decided by the vague perception of winningness. There would be a kayfabe justification for them fighting in that tier and a kayfabe justification when they drop out of it.

As for Omega, let me argue this from a different angle. You talk about the difference between Taker and SC's overness despite both being top guys. How much of that is due to their record? Between the two, who won more? What about their in-ring careers justified the crowds reaction to them? Unless you're Rainman, the honest answer to that is "I don't know off the top of my head." My guess is that SC's feel of being a bigger deal comes from him being the more successful character draw and then had his record reflect that in accordance to WWF's personality driven tradition.

The fact that I struggle to frame SC's success without breaking Kayfabe is a testament to how little the kayfabe organization really means and how unintuitive things are when the memory of wins and losses is solely at the mercy of booking, logical or otherwise.Undertaker might have won more matches but less titles and we might never remember because none of that was important to the WWF at that time.


Kenny's character is over because his reputation as the best of the best proceeds him. In a promotion that claims to be sports centered this is expected to seem irrelevant to his current success while also informing his behavior and our perception of him. Having a seasonal record makes being a winner who loses a plausible reality without necessarily damaging the wrestler's brand. Just ask the Dallas Cowboys, the NFL's winningest team and the biggest NFL money draw who is also 7-8 as of this post and hasn't won a Super Bowl in 23 seasons.

The illusion of competitive structure justifying everyone being there, framing every loss and victory as a loss and victory and not a creative commentary on a wrestlers value as a performer is why Kenny is protected. In the other system, his popularity, not the kayfabe competition takes center stage. Why? because what else will you look to to get an indicator of how successful this guy is without actual record keeping?

3. It's not about not looking like WWE. It's about having a reason to exist beyond being "WWE under better management." The reason I watch AEW is because I want to watch something that isn't a WWE style show. The only way to make a show like that is to not assume WWE's format.

I've already said before that there needs to be more thought out systems put in place, and the Sky example you mention is an example of the WWE style booking, not a consequence of a record keeping.

No offense, but what I find silly is this idea that cutting the system entirely is the best course of action and the show won't lose anything anything because of it. To me, this just sounds like a preference for off the cuff booking and not an issue of whether the system can work.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

imthegame19 said:


> What doesn't make you modern is you don't know what bullshit is and isn't. Anyone calling Janela matches with Omega and Moxley as bullshit. Shows how out of touch you and some others are. You guys just run your mouths because you don't like someone. Without how those matches do in ratings or YouTube views etc.
> 
> 
> Or 1990s view of job guys vs how it's done today in wrestling. When fans are smart and know what job guy is or isn't and just wanna see their favorite get a dominant win. It doesn't matter if job guy is 6'2 300 pounds or 5'7 160 if they lose in 1 to 3 minutes every week.Again you aren't worth my time.


Those are certainly all words.



Dondada78 said:


> AEW needs to make investments in the right talents. They lost out on Jacob Fatu, Alex Hammerstone, Eli Drake, Harry Smith & Marshall Von Erich. They will also likely miss out on Brian Cage as well. Right now, Tony Khan needs to back up a brinks truck to the home of Killer Kross and pray he signs cause he has the potential to be a needle mover who has no prior relationship with the WWE.


Killer Kross’ hot af girlfriend is signed with WWE. I doubt he ends up anywhere but there.



imthegame19 said:


> AJ Styles, Gallows/Anderson, Nakumara, Usos, Mike Kanellis, Randy Orton resigned who were actually set to be Free agents. Jon Moxley, Dustin Rhodes and Shawn Spears left for AEW(they also got Santana/Ortiz from TNA/Impact). Really out of the guys who resigned with WWE only Gallows/Anderson surprised me. Everyone else was always expected to stay.
> 
> 
> Remember Jericho said from day 1. That they only wanted some select guys from WWE. So who knows how many of those guys that resigned AEW actually wanted.
> ...


Lol, that line from Jericho is just bullshit. There’s no way they didn’t want Nakamura, Styles, Orton and The Usos. Come off it.

Also, lol at DOTL accidentally making my point for me re: commentary. Yes, a commentator’s job is to sell. That’s exactly the point.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

tbh killer kross is probably not headed for AEW or WWE.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. Yes. But it's not specific. There's a big yet subtle difference between "I'm a loser and I want to win" compared to "I lost 5 times in a row and is now one loss away from having a losing record." The difference comes down to the nebulous versus the concrete. The latter motivation is one that can be played around with and can be used to make one loser look different from another. If this is about the story as we all claim that it is, then why should everyone in the lower card have a default situation so generic? Keeping W-Ls a vague sense invites nothing but vague context. In real sports, there is always a search for a narrative, and that narrative starts from the personal and specific situation of each team. You can't have a specific situation for each team if there's no record of what they've done. This is true if you write down wins and losses or not. Breaks and personnel changes are a natural benefit of having a season in sports, but I would argue this is just a small sliver of the true reason we have them. The real reason seasons crop up a lot is that human, and even animal behavior is characterized by a type of environmental efficiency. Everything from school and TV to bird migration is in accordance to this seasonal rhythm because complex life is are more efficient when it does different things at different times of the year.
> 
> The weirdness is the same for wrestling for this reason. So much so that even WWE has a vague sort of structure around their 5 big ppvs, ending with a wipe of old feuds and a draft. So I don't understand how leaning into a yearly re-contextualization because of a record changes is any different.
> 
> ...


1. For me this will always come down to we never needed official numbers to understand or get wrestling. I definitely see what you mean as far as things becoming more officially concrete, but to me personally it's just not needed. What it adds doesn't feel substantial enough to really justify it. 

To give my perspective it's like this. I've been into MMA for ever. I remember watching the UFC before they had official rankings. But even back then everybody had a good idea of who were the top guys and things like that. Though with it being a real sport the addition of official rankings isn't something I was against. For me though with wrestling I view it more closer to something like anime or comic books. With those you don't need official W-L records or rankings to understand where someone stands. The writing will let you know where they stand. Take something like Dragon Ball Piccolo has never beaten anybody of note. But the way the story is written you understand that he is the top guy of that 2nd tier. But if they had like an official record going on with Dragon Ball it would distract from his greatness because all you see is L's with no real context of how good he really is. 

2. But it doesn't though because we all know, all wins and losses aren't created equal. Take for instance before the last Dark episode of the year Sammy Guevara was winless just like Peter Avalon and Brandon Cutler. But common sense informed you that despite having the same record of being winless Peter Avalon and Sammy Guevara were not equals. That comes down to the fact that one was being treated as a prospect to watch and the others were being treated as cannon fodder. 

3. I brought up the Scorpio Sky and Darby instances to show that despite this new structure, the fact that it's still wrestling means things will be done however seen fit. The W-L records gives the appearance of a structure, but in reality it's not. Because at the drop of a hat if they want to break that system they will and they'll give any reason why. Such as when they tried to justify why Darby Allin who had won 1 over Cima on Dark was the more worthy contender over PAC who was undefeated with wins over Omega and Hangman Page. Logically following the structure of a W-L record Pac should've challenged Jericho. But in reality we know they didn't want to do heel vs heel for the title.


4. No offense taken lol. We both clearly disagree with each other. But it's been a clean debate nobody's insulting each other it's all good.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

Win/loss records to me is a bad idea in a fake sport. Wrestling is fake. We all know it. Kayfabe died a long time ago.

It just further emphasises the "I am a better wrestler than you" storyline that is, well, boring.

Like I gave a shit that Stone Cold was 34-5 in 1999. 

Character work is what matters.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

It gets in the way. People are always going to be thinking about how much people have won or lost instead of how they’ve won or lost and whether it told the right story.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. For me this will always come down to we never needed official numbers to understand or get wrestling. I definitely see what you mean as far as things becoming more officially concrete, but to me personally it's just not needed. What it adds doesn't feel substantial enough to really justify it.
> 
> To give my perspective it's like this. I've been into MMA for ever. I remember watching the UFC before they had official rankings. But even back then everybody had a good idea of who were the top guys and things like that. Though with it being a real sport the addition of official rankings isn't something I was against. For me though with wrestling I view it more closer to something like anime or comic books. With those you don't need official W-L records or rankings to understand where someone stands. The writing will let you know where they stand. Take something like Dragon Ball Piccolo has never beaten anybody of note. But the way the story is written you understand that he is the top guy of that 2nd tier. But if they had like an official record going on with Dragon Ball it would distract from his greatness because all you see is L's with no real context of how good he really is.
> 
> ...




1. I suppose it's just a difference of opinion here. I can't go any further than that.

As to your examples, the thing about Dragon Ball is that it did have records on occasion. Some of the highest highs in Dragon Ball was when there were structured stakes. I'll give you an example. In early Dragon Ball between every major arc they'd have a tournament. These tournaments weren't just exhibitions, they were the best way to gauge Goku and his friends' growth. Many times they'd be what the entire story was climaxing towards. Piccolo debuted in one of these tournaments. Later on, they added powerlevels. Something, despite only being a part of the Saiyan/Freeza saga people still speculate on today. Fake metrics can be effective.

Another manga to consider is One Piece. They literally track where each pirate roughly ranks through their bounty system, how many Road Poneglyphs they have, the size of the fleet, their title within their fleet and reputation to the World at large. Naruto was all about the characters obtaining a structured rank and literally kept a record of all their missions. One Punch man ranks monster threat levels. I can go on.

One thing all these anime/manga have in common is that structured ranking can serve to gamify the story. I get invested heavily when Luffy gets a new bounty, and the chounin exam wouldn't have meant much if there were no rules to it. Gamification of a story serves to give the writers a set of rules everyone can see and everyone will know he broke, if he does so. If the chounin exam had a vague sense of importance then Naruto turning in his written exam without answering a single question wouldn't have made such an impact.

Yeah you might get a sense that Goku was stronger than Nappa, but only his powerlevel reading became a meme. Why? Because numbers mean something more than "this guy is strong." Over 9000 has so many applications, and none you need to explain.

Some of these stories became less interesting the less structured they became. DB devolved from being a story of self improvement to being a story about a random alien invader. Who cares? Naruto devolved from being a story about a "loser" rising in prominence in a military/intel organization, to being about him chasing a feather-haired emo around.

You see, it's not about gauging who's tough and who isn't. it's as simple as giving the characters a game to overcome, a game the audience can speculate on. Just like a sport.

2. That's an issue of perspective. I've said in my previous post that Kenny's prestige is divorced from his seasonal record. This is because the record isn't short hand for a guys potential. It's merely where he places in the game. Before a season starts the Browns have the same record as the Patriots. The fact we know there's probably a gulf between their ability doesn't change the fact that they have to prove it in the game.

3. That just comes down to commitment to the concept, not the concept itself. Remember when Jericho got on the locker room for burying the ref? If the tendency to do whatever the heck you wanted to do was inevitable why did he fight against that? Just because AEW may struggle to commit to the concept of a record doesn't mean its something they shouldn't try to uphold. In fact, I'd say the opposite. The fact that there is a tendency among some in the company to go outlaw means that illusion of competition needs to be even more protected, not dismantled.

4. Agreed. It's much more pleasant to discus things when it's not about tearing down the other person.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> Win/loss records to me is a bad idea in a fake sport. Wrestling is fake. We all know it. Kayfabe died a long time ago.
> 
> It just further emphasises the "I am a better wrestler than you" storyline that is, well, boring.
> 
> ...


To me character is goal and motivation. Not just catch phrases and fake punches. A character shouldn't have to wait to be booked a goal. Every character, from the losingest loser, to the winningest winner's goal needs to be overcoming whatever system and competitor put in their way and become the best.

Wrestling is fake, but it doesn't have to feel fake. Stone Cold going around like Bugs bunny, causing problems for his kayfabe/real boss never felt real. Austin felt real, but his situation was ludicrous. Needlessly so. it was the type of wrestling I never cared for.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

DOTL said:


> To me character is goal and motivation. Not just catch phrases and fake punches. A character shouldn't have to wait to be booked a goal. Every character, from the losingest loser, to the winningest winner's goal needs to be overcoming whatever system and competitor put in their way and become the best.
> 
> Wrestling is fake, but it doesn't have to feel fake. Stone Cold going around like Bugs bunny, causing problems for his kayfabe/real boss never felt real. Austin felt real, but his situation was ludicrous. Needlessly so. it was the type of wrestling I never cared for.


Austin lived out a relatable storyline. Most of us have worked for a boss that we legitimately disliked. Thankfully I currently don’t but I’ve had a few that i would stunner. Women included.

And honestly, that’s what made Austin work. If AEW can find a storyline that is relatable to the masses, they’ve got themselves a winner.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

optikk sucks said:


> Austin lived out a relatable storyline. Most of us have worked for a boss that we legitimately disliked. Thankfully I currently don’t but I’ve had a few that i would stunner. Women included.
> 
> And honestly, that’s what made Austin work. If AEW can find a storyline that is relatable to the masses, they’ve got themselves a winner.


Maybe, but that's not the type of wrestling that works for everybody. If you look at WCW's top story it was about one wrestling culture invading another.

As far as I'm concerned, Sting's story line with Hogan (apart from the botched ending) was way better than most story lines Austin was ever involved in. Why is that? Because it wasn't a simple appeal to relatability. It was a long form character study on a guy loyal to his company, but finding his allies questioning him, despite being the only guy in his circle of friends who hadn't been to WWF. Combine that with the fact that the leader of this invading group is a wrestler people have wanted to see him face for a long, long time.

The story line works because it takes seriously the structures and kayfabe/shoot institutions established by the world. I'm sorry but some frustrated guy using Mikey Whipreck's move on some annoying middle-age man isn't as engaging. 

AEW needs to stick with building story lines that respect the world they created. Those, I think, pay off more consistently than just a single relatable guy, raising hell. .


----------



## Gh0stFace (Oct 10, 2019)

Funny how WWE's top star who beat Lesnar clean (Rollins) is some dude I stared a booing chant against in 2009 bc he was so boring after Bucks stole the show. Then he proceeded to powerbomb his opponent (Austin Aries) against the barricades by me to try and prove me wrong


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Gh0stFace said:


> Funny how WWE's top star who beat Lesnar clean (Rollins) is some dude I stared a booing chant against in 2009 bc he was so boring after Bucks stole the show. Then he proceeded to powerbomb his opponent (Austin Aries) against the barricades by me to try and prove me wrong


The young bucks got so salty about criticism they disabled twitter in 2019, but ok bring up a story about a guy in developmental from almost 11 years ago.


----------



## Gh0stFace (Oct 10, 2019)

reyfan said:


> The young bucks got so salty about criticism they disabled twitter in 2019, but ok bring up a story about a guy in developmental from almost 11 years ago.


Twitter is full of social rejects who are stuck in their parent's basements with no jobs so their only satisfaction is attempting to get a rise out of people who made it. Fuck Twitter, I don't use it and I would've done the same if I was them


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Wood said:


> That is long, and you are not as interesting as me to read, so I won’t. I got as far as you proclaiming to speak for the wrestling industry. You don’t.
> 
> A commentator’s job isn’t spin. That’s the real bullshit. That’s what you’re trying to assign to the guy. Make something bad good. Fuck off. Put something good on, call it as good. That’s a commentator’s job. You’re either young or stupid, but you don’t understand the subject matter, that much is evident.
> 
> ...


So, why wasn’t JR calling out Sable powerbombing Marc Mero as inherently stupid, circa 1997/98?

I’m genuinely looking forward to seeing how you view this.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

Gh0stFace said:


> Twitter is full of social rejects who are stuck in their parent's basements with no jobs so their only satisfaction is attempting to get a rise out of people who made it. Fuck Twitter, I don't use it and I would've done the same if I was them


Says the guy who a mere post earlier was waxing poetic about "starting a booing chant" back in 2009 like it was a crowning achievement.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

Here's an idea @DOTL and @RapShepard - What would you guys think about a "Tier" System? It basically is a happy medium between straight up records and no records at all. Let's say they make 3-5 Tiers. You have to be in Tier 1 to get a World Title Shot. So basically each guy is ranked Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, (Tier 4 & 5 if used). Basically split your roster to where there is an even number of guys in each tier. For instance, for a 50 man roster, 10-16 men in each tier. You get into those tiers based on overall win-loss-draw record that is not really recorded officially but once those are set in order to advance to a different tier you have to beat someone in that tier and the person who lost takes your old place. Let's say they do the records thing for 2020 and at the end of the year they can put people into tiers dependant on these records and then start 2021 with the "tier" System.

In a sense this would create a system for advancement and could essentially make every match interesting because an advanced "tier" could be defended. Let's say Tier 1 Kenny Omega takes on Tier 2 Jelly Janela. If Jelly beats Omega then he goes to Tier 1 and Omega drops down to Tier 2. This could just be a natural progression of the records system and a transition into something new without having to completely reneg on their idea to have a records system. It could have the same positive effects of the record system without some of the negatives of the records system. I know some stuff would need to be ironed out but I think the concept in general could work if done right, keep in mind I just pulled this out of nowhere so there might be some set backs I haven't thought out yet. Thoughts?


----------



## validreasoning (Jul 4, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> Win/loss records to me is a bad idea in a fake sport. Wrestling is fake. We all know it. Kayfabe died a long time ago.
> 
> It just further emphasises the "I am a better wrestler than you" storyline that is, well, boring.
> 
> ...


Being fake isn't issue. I mean Goldberg and Takers win loss records were two of the biggest things in this business over past 30 years.

It's how you use it. Having everyones win loss records on TV each week was never going to work because of the entertainment nature of us tv pro wrestling and the amount of matches that take place.

In many ways it's similar to when TNA tried the rounds concept a few years ago and it failed miserably. It worked brilliantly in world of sport in the UK in 70-80s but didn't transfer to us tv pro wrestling. UK had cartoon stuff too like haystacks and big daddy but the multiple rounds was much easier to digest there.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

BigCy said:


> Here's an idea @DOTL and @RapShepard - What would you guys think about a "Tier" System? It basically is a happy medium between straight up records and no records at all. Let's say they make 3-5 Tiers. You have to be in Tier 1 to get a World Title Shot. So basically each guy is ranked Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, (Tier 4 & 5 if used). Basically split your roster to where there is an even number of guys in each tier. For instance, for a 50 man roster, 10-16 men in each tier. You get into those tiers based on overall win-loss-draw record that is not really recorded officially but once those are set in order to advance to a different tier you have to beat someone in that tier and the person who lost takes your old place. Let's say they do the records thing for 2020 and at the end of the year they can put people into tiers dependant on these records and then start 2021 with the "tier" System.
> 
> In a sense this would create a system for advancement and could essentially make every match interesting because an advanced "tier" could be defended. Let's say Tier 1 Kenny Omega takes on Tier 2 Jelly Janela. If Jelly beats Omega then he goes to Tier 1 and Omega drops down to Tier 2. This could just be a natural progression of the records system and a transition into something new without having to completely reneg on their idea to have a records system. It could have the same positive effects of the record system without some of the negatives of the records system. I know some stuff would need to be ironed out but I think the concept in general could work if done right, keep in mind I just pulled this out of nowhere so there might be some set backs I haven't thought out yet. Thoughts?


I personally don't like it. You put some thought into it so that's cool. But I just thing like W-L records it's trying to fix something that wasn't really broken. The first thing that comes to my mind is what happens if Janela beat Omega, but it's due to interference from another tier 1 guy Omega was feuding with. 

What happens if on an episode of Dynamite we have a match that has a match between 2 tier 1 wrestlers and a match between 2 tier 2 wrestlers. Does the winner of the tier 2 match get to replace the loser of the tier 1 match? Surely there should be some penalty for losing even if it's against the same tier.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

BigCy said:


> Here's an idea @DOTL and @RapShepard - What would you guys think about a "Tier" System? It basically is a happy medium between straight up records and no records at all. Let's say they make 3-5 Tiers. You have to be in Tier 1 to get a World Title Shot. So basically each guy is ranked Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, (Tier 4 & 5 if used). Basically split your roster to where there is an even number of guys in each tier. For instance, for a 50 man roster, 10-16 men in each tier. You get into those tiers based on overall win-loss-draw record that is not really recorded officially but once those are set in order to advance to a different tier you have to beat someone in that tier and the person who lost takes your old place. Let's say they do the records thing for 2020 and at the end of the year they can put people into tiers dependant on these records and then start 2021 with the "tier" System.
> 
> In a sense this would create a system for advancement and could essentially make every match interesting because an advanced "tier" could be defended. Let's say Tier 1 Kenny Omega takes on Tier 2 Jelly Janela. If Jelly beats Omega then he goes to Tier 1 and Omega drops down to Tier 2. This could just be a natural progression of the records system and a transition into something new without having to completely reneg on their idea to have a records system. It could have the same positive effects of the record system without some of the negatives of the records system. I know some stuff would need to be ironed out but I think the concept in general could work if done right, keep in mind I just pulled this out of nowhere so there might be some set backs I haven't thought out yet. Thoughts?


This type of thinking is what I like. Record, no record, there needs to be kayfabe structure of competition if they want to appear sportslike. IMO, it's not clinical commentary, avoidance to silly gimmicks, or athleticism, but this I think of when I hear "sport" The tier system reminds me a bit of divisions in the NFL. Everyone in a division gets a shot at the playoffs, they just have to beat the record of everyone else in their division. Your record only matters to your division, and the overall record is used to break ties. Each quarter, since AEW has 4 ppvs, they can factor in those records for title opportunities between division leaders.

At first I didn't understand the resistance to such ideas, but now I understand that it is because of a tension between WWE/F looser brand of storytelling and the kind of stories I like. I think I like the idea of this type of structure because even when I was a kid, I hated how WWF was just a bunch of guys fighting for no reason. I mean, what type of company just hires guys to fight on TV without any type of formal competitive scheme? It was dumb then and even dumber now.

High tier guys can be grouped together, and so on. This way, guys like Mox and Omega can be division rivals regardless of who they have to fight. Low tier guys, no matter who they beat, will only be competing with other low tier guys. When division leaders must fight to determine the number one contender, you'll have mostly high card guys and a few underdogs who qualified for the high card league. You can even get creative and mix each division with a variety of top-mid card guys so that the number one contendership won't be 1 high tier guy with a bunch of lower tier guys. Midcard talent can have their own league that works the same way, the the prize being the midcard belt of course. Lowcard talent can serve as filler for the midcard league.


----------



## Seafort (Jun 5, 2014)

Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> Somebody was watching WWE and said there's not enough wrestling so they made AEW be all wrestling, but when matches don't have a story, don't have a build, and don't affect title contention then it's like watching a house show-- it's a nice diversion but ultimately a waste of time. Nothing in AEW feels like it has any stakes unless it's directly related to Jericho, Cody or Moxley, everybody else is exhibition filler.


Brilliant response. This was cited as a warning *before *AEW Dynamite launched, and was proven right. There are three core problems with WWE that a well-funded startup should seek to do the exact oppposite

1. Lack of wrestler creativity with promos and matches (everything is scripted to the last letter)
2. Wrestling for wrestling's sake (WWE desperately needs to fill endless hours of programming and does not have the creative horsepower to book feuds for it all, plus does not want to risk creating offensive storylines)
3. Lack of meaningful characters

Let's address how AEW has solved for this:

1. For Jericho, Cody, Moxley, and a few others this has been fine. Their promos have been highlights. However these are few and far between. When introducing a cast of unknowns, you cannot just throw them out there without introduction. There needed to be more promos (either backstage or ringside) on Dynamite to introduce us to the new characters. A perfect example are the Dark Order segments. The first one should have aired on Week 1 and slowly built from there. Instead, they had the nameless, characterless Dark Order show up for a couple of weeks and *then* had introductory vignettes.
2. There's as much if not more wrestling than on RAW. The most hardcore fanbase wants this, but it is by no means a path to gaining casual viewers. In fact I think WWE is in real trouble if they talk themselves into believing that RAW and Smackdown need to become clones of NXT.
3. Partially addressed in fits and starts. But a lot more needs to be done.

So two of the three points have only been partially addressed, and on another point they're trying to out ROH/NXT the competition.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

bdon said:


> So, why wasn’t JR calling out Sable powerbombing Marc Mero as inherently stupid, circa 1997/98?
> 
> I’m genuinely looking forward to seeing how you view this.


I can't remember exactly what the call was at the time, but I don't think JR would have called too many more high profile Marc Mero matches after that point. His career basically died. And yes, JR did call out shit during the Attitude era all the time. Usually Russo's shitty under-card stuff. The WWF were also rolling at the time, which makes things a lot easier to call. You can get away with shit while you're hot. 

When you're cold and you're reaching, it's far more of a risk to put it all out there. You're far less likely to get anything back and run people off. When wrestling was cool in 1998, JR could potentially call shit like a Gangrel match and not look like a piece of shit for selling it like it mattered. But if he were to put his reputation on the stake and that's your semi-main. Oh boy.


----------



## Saintpat (Dec 18, 2013)

DOTL said:


> This type of thinking is what I like. Record, no record, there needs to be kayfabe structure of competition if they want to appear sportslike. IMO, it's not clinical commentary, avoidance to silly gimmicks, or athleticism, but this I think of when I hear "sport" The tier system reminds me a bit of divisions in the NFL. Everyone in a division gets a shot at the playoffs, they just have to beat the record of everyone else in their division. Your record only matters to your division, and the overall record is used to break ties. Each quarter, since AEW has 4 ppvs, they can factor in those records for title opportunities between division leaders.
> 
> At first I didn't understand the resistance to such ideas, but now I understand that it is because of a tension between WWE/F looser brand of storytelling and the kind of stories I like. I think I like the idea of this type of structure because even when I was a kid, I hated how WWF was just a bunch of guys fighting for no reason. I mean, what type of company just hires guys to fight on TV without any type of formal competitive scheme? It was dumb then and even dumber now.
> 
> High tier guys can be grouped together, and so on. This way, guys like Mox and Omega can be division rivals regardless of who they have to fight. Low tier guys, no matter who they beat, will only be competing with other low tier guys. When division leaders must fight to determine the number one contender, you'll have mostly high card guys and a few underdogs who qualified for the high card league. You can even get creative and mix each division with a variety of top-mid card guys so that the number one contendership won't be 1 high tier guy with a bunch of lower tier guys. Midcard talent can have their own league that works the same way, the the prize being the midcard belt of course. Lowcard talent can serve as filler for the midcard league.


This doesn’t work for me because the tiers are arbitrary: Omega is tier 1 because he’s Omega, even if he’s losing as many matches as he’s winning (including to CIMA, who is not tier 1) ... but he stays tier 1 and gets PPV matches because, well, he’s one of the best in the world even if what he’s done in AEW doesn’t reflect that.

It also puts a glass ceiling on the tier 2 and 3 guys — well you’re still a midcarder, you’re just one of the better midcarders.

Like MJF is someone they need in the top tier, but there’s nothing to suggest he’s really tier 1 except he’s beaten Page, but is Page really tier 1? Does one victory over Page make you tier 1, even though all you’ve done otherwise is beat Brandon Cutler and some other guy no one has heard of?

AEW is going to do things the way it wants and I’m not saying they should do it another way just because I think so, but I like the Chikara system where you accumulate points for wins and when you amass enough points then you get a title shot. Singles pinfall is worth the most, singles win by some other method (count-out or DQ) is worth next most, getting the pin in a tag win is worth something and being on the winning side in a tag match but not getting the pin is worth a little something but not as much. And losses by each method set you back. Something like that.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> I personally don't like it. You put some thought into it so that's cool. But I just thing like W-L records it's trying to fix something that wasn't really broken. The first thing that comes to my mind is what happens if Janela beat Omega, but it's due to interference from another tier 1 guy Omega was feuding with.
> 
> What happens if on an episode of Dynamite we have a match that has a match between 2 tier 1 wrestlers and a match between 2 tier 2 wrestlers. Does the winner of the tier 2 match get to replace the loser of the tier 1 match? Surely there should be some penalty for losing even if it's against the same tier.


Yeah, there would definitely need kinks ironed out. If 2 guys/teams beat another guy/team from the same tier then nothing special happens, they both remain in the same tier, it could create opportunities for them to be made ready to challenge for a higher tier but nothing concrete that says "so and so is at the bottom of the tier!" if that were the case then it would be best just to stick with the records system as is. No real penalty for losing against a guy from the same tier, much like it would be without the system. It only really becomes relevant when someone of a lower tier is facing someone from another tier. They could hype it like "Jelly Janela is trying to 'level up' against Jazz Hands Omega! Omega since he's tier 1 can get a title shot but will Jelly Janela ruin his flow? Will Jelly janela take Omega's opportunity?" Interference won't matter, a win is a win and a loss would be a loss. 

I just think it would be a good way to have a "records-lite" system so that there is some ranking and hiearchy without having embarassing looking numbers like WORLD CHAMP Marko Stunt 2-65-1. I'm eggerating of course but there might end up being something like 14-9-2 which just looks like a bad record for a world champion. I suppose they COULD make it look like an MMA or Boxing World Champs record and have it be like 21-2 or something. Plus they could also more easily avoid booking themselves in a corner and when a lower tier challenges a higher tier it could almost be like a mini championship match so it could have a little relevance.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Saintpat said:


> This doesn’t work for me because the tiers are arbitrary: Omega is tier 1 because he’s Omega, even if he’s losing as many matches as he’s winning (including to CIMA, who is not tier 1) ... but he stays tier 1 and gets PPV matches because, well, he’s one of the best in the world even if what he’s done in AEW doesn’t reflect that.
> 
> It also puts a glass ceiling on the tier 2 and 3 guys — well you’re still a midcarder, you’re just one of the better midcarders.
> 
> ...


That's just the natural consequence of wrestling being a popularity contest. Like all sports tiers are based on past perceived success. Just because perceived success is created by a mixture of booking and crowd favoritism doesn't mean it's arbitrary. A simple fix to this concern is you just build tiers based off of how people got over in the past seasons and long term story potential. Such a thing would would have to start somewhere. 

I like your bottom proposal. It reminds me of boxing's ranking system, as rankings are determined by more factors than just a W-L.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

How about you just do wrestling? Give two people a genuine reason to want to fight each other, let them talk shit about each other, then throw them out there and one wins and one loses? Why do you need all this overcomplicated tier/rankings/record bullshit? It just puts you into a corner when your own statistics start generating a narrative you don't necessarily want to tell. You don't need _any_ of that shit. Part of the beauty of wrestling is that you can just heat someone up if you want to and there's your gate/ratings/buys. You're only making it harder for yourself by publicly releasing data that makes that more difficult -- even impossible.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> How about you just do wrestling? Give two people a genuine reason to want to fight each other, let them talk shit about each other, then throw them out there and one wins and one loses? Why do you need all this overcomplicated tier/rankings/record bullshit? It just puts you into a corner when your own statistics start generating a narrative you don't necessarily want to tell. You don't need _any_ of that shit. Part of the beauty of wrestling is that you can just heat someone up if you want to and there's your gate/ratings/buys. You're only making it harder for yourself by publicly releasing data that makes that more difficult -- even impossible.


Because two guys just fighting is never enough. That crap hasn't worked since the Rock/Cena, and even the success of that was due to it being a "dream match" of sorts with years of Rock and Cena talking crap. But here's some news: people are more sophisticated than ever before. They don't take this crap seriously anymore and that's because the "just let the fellas wrastle" approach is incomplete

This fact is why we have McMahon putting on dumbass fake weddings and putting jackasses in dog costumes. He's smart enough to know guys just wrestling isn't enough,but too stupid to realize the solution is already on TV. Rivalries have always had stakes and goals and motivations to prop them up, goals that historically revolved around winning matches.THAT is what always separates one match from another. In a show that calls itself sports based, the motivation should be clear. To climb the ranks to become champion.

That should be the goal of every competitor and seeing that should be the desire of anyone who watches a sports centric wrestling show.

I don't understand how "bookers can't be lazy in their storytelling" is a good argument against taking the "sport" in "sportscentric" a bit more seriously. If I wanted to watch idiots hit each other because they hate each other I'd just watch street fights on youtube.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> Because two guys just fighting is never enough. That crap hasn't worked since the Rock/Cena, and even the success of that was due to it being a "dream match" of sorts with years of Rock and Cena talking crap. But here's some news: people are more sophisticated than ever before. They don't take this crap seriously anymore and that's because the "just let the fellas wrastle" approach is incomplete
> 
> This fact is why we have McMahon putting on dumbass fake weddings and putting jackasses in dog costumes. He's smart enough to know guys just wrestling isn't enough,but too stupid to realize the solution is already on TV. Rivalries have always had stakes and goals and motivations to prop them up, goals that historically revolved around winning matches.THAT is what always separates one match from another. In a show that calls itself sports based, the motivation should be clear. To climb the ranks to become champion.
> 
> ...


Those were certainly all words. 

You say two guys fighting is never enough and then came back to two guys fighting. A fight is a story. It's a conflict. Story is literally conflict. I mean, you're attaching bells to sound "sophisticated," but it's actually just making the waters more murky. 

That shitty Raw wedding (which I refuse to watch) just presumably took Raw to 2.44 million viewers. That's about _four times_ the audience of AEW. Say what you want about audiences being more sophisticated, but I'll take "citation needed" on that one. It's more of this elitism that pops up when talking about wrestling. That it needs to "evolve" instead of remaining simple and logical, because audiences are "too smart" for that now.

And I wasn't even trying to turn this into a "workrate" argument (ew). I'm talking wrestling, as in a proper wrestling presentation. I'm not just markishly talking about the bell-to-bell. I am talking about the psychology, the booking, the promos, the heat, the angles, the blood. There's a tried and true recipe for how this shit emotionally hooks people wired a certain way, and people keep trying to fuck with the formula because they refuse to think of themselves as people that can be a slave to their emotions that way -- but almost every single area of entertainment, and even some people in politics -- and taken stuff that works in wrestling and adapted it. Nerds involved in the business today and the ones that are scared of wrestling tactics. It's so weird. And they are also the easiest people to work. 

What you're trying to describe, in a roundabout way, is simply a push. You need to push a wrestler. You don't need a win-loss record for that. That's insanity, or at least a misunderstanding of how wrestling can be presented more effectively than it is currently.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Those were certainly all words.
> 
> You say two guys fighting is never enough and then came back to two guys fighting. A fight is a story. It's a conflict. Story is literally conflict. I mean, you're attaching bells to sound "sophisticated," but it's actually just making the waters more murky.
> 
> ...



Here are some more words.

A fight is a story, but wrestling has always been more than a fight. Otherwise what would be the point of have some matches being more important than others? What's the point of a belt? What's the point of calling it PROFESSIONAL wrestling? Even back in the carny days they had a structured reason to fight. They'd say "my money says your town can't produce a wrestler good enough to beat our guy." And then the crowd would get invested in the guy getting beat. 

2.44m? Seriously? You do realize that 2.44m is a shadow of the former numbers wrestling used to get even 7 years ago. And my point about people being sophisticated isn't that they are too smart for the loose booking of the WWE, it's that they are savvy enough to be thoroughly invested in a structured wrestling competition in a way that adds to their enjoyment of it. Considering that sports are both more popular and more complicated than wrestling, I don't even see how this is even controversial.

Everything I say doesn't preclude "wrestling tactics." It just assumes that those tactics will work in conjunction with an actual kayfabe competitive universe instead of just building where dudes walking around backstage aimlessly and fight because they get told to and pretend don't like each other. The reason people use wrestling tactics is because at the end of the day, it's designed to bring people into their world, pick a side, and pay money. It doesn't mean the rules and structure of the event have to disappear. In fact, Mohammad Ali was influenced and influenced wrestlers. And if you don't remember, Ali was a a competitor in a real sport, with rankings and statistics and a governing body. Creating an illusion of sport builds psychology because its builds an actual kayfabe structure for all the feuding, heat, angles, and promos. It's the same old stuff, just actually applied in a consistent, structured, world.

What's really insane is that we're describing ranking competitively in terms of pushes, and heat, and all this wrestling slang when people 40 years ago never described a wrestler gaining momentum that way. They knew what ranking was, they could follow competitions easy enough but the concept of a "push" was foreign to them. Normal people might not be as invested in wrestling as we are, but they're certainly capable of understanding that this guy is competing against this guy because his rank will improve. Doesn't stop people from enjoying boxing or football any.And I propose this because I think people will enjoy it. I find it funny that all of the arguments against this comes from the place of creative and booking and not whether or not the audience will find it engaging. .


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

DOTL said:


> *Because two guys just fighting is never enough*. That crap hasn't worked since the Rock/Cena, and even the success of that was due to it being a "dream match" of sorts with years of Rock and Cena talking crap. But here's some news: people are more sophisticated than ever before. They don't take this crap seriously anymore and that's because the "just let the fellas wrastle" approach is incomplete
> 
> This fact is why we have McMahon putting on dumbass fake weddings and putting jackasses in dog costumes. He's smart enough to know guys just wrestling isn't enough,but too stupid to realize the solution is already on TV. Rivalries have always had stakes and goals and motivations to prop them up, goals that historically revolved around winning matches.THAT is what always separates one match from another. In a show that calls itself sports based, the motivation should be clear. To climb the ranks to become champion.
> 
> ...


To be fair, it is if they build the story right. I'm still neutral on the records/no records thing I just think it has to be done just so in order for it to be done in a creative way that won't cause booking problems or be so convulated that it starts confusing people. I think if they get it JUST right then it can be a beautiful thing that adds more depth to the system. I'm not sure what that is yet but hopefully they get it right in 2020 and if not then the idea should probably be scrapped or transitioned into just a simple ranking system with no win-loss-draw record. WCW did this and it worked pretty well. 



The Wood said:


> Those were certainly all words.
> 
> You say two guys fighting is never enough and then came back to two guys fighting. A fight is a story. It's a conflict. Story is literally conflict. I mean, you're attaching bells to sound "sophisticated," but it's actually just making the waters more murky.
> 
> ...


Some good points here, especially your first paragraph. I'm still trying to work ideas in my head on how the record system they brought up can work to where it won't backfire on them later or cause confusion for the fans. You're right in the aspect that it doesn't need it and the simple way is often best. Kind of like what NWA is doing and NJPW does.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

BigCy said:


> *To be fair, it is if they build the story right. * I'm still neutral on the records/no records thing I just think it has to be done just so in order for it to be done in a creative way that won't cause booking problems or be so convulated that it starts confusing people. I think if they get it JUST right then it can be a beautiful thing that adds more depth to the system. I'm not sure what that is yet but hopefully they get it right in 2020 and if not then the idea should probably be scrapped or transitioned into just a simple ranking system with no win-loss-draw record. WCW did this and it worked pretty well.


That's true, but I think you'll find it's harder to get people to care about something like that more consistently if that's all there was.That's why we have belts, 18,000 match varieties, fake commissioners/general managers. Every other show, con, and narrative has to have a plausible world. I don't see why wrestling is any different.The personal story should supplement not replace the competitive structure of the promotion. And you're right. Having a system that works will create something special. Doing nothing is boring.


----------



## Patrick Mercier (Nov 29, 2019)

I certainly won't complain that AEW isn't trying to do something that stands out from WWE and the rest. There are growing pains along the way but it's part of the process.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

To have your entire company based around rankings and win/loss records is boring. Wrestling is boring enough as it is now with hardly any characters or personality, lets make it even more dull by having Black against Murphy with the winner elevated to third tier and the loser stays in the fourth tier. 

Who the hell cares? May as well go back to the 60's.

I do actually like ranking systems. Even in wrestling. But on something like wwe2k19 for my own enjoyment, even making my own spreadsheet and keeping track of wins and losses but I can see how the majority would find if boring. 

Professional wrestling is not a sport. I love a great match just as much as anyone but if that great match was between two bland guys with no character or personality fighting just to see who can advance to number 4 in tier 2 - nah, sorry but I cant think of anything more duller. 

Godfather fueding with Al Snow on the other hand because Snow has stolen a hoe - yes please.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

Rozzop said:


> To have your entire company based around rankings and win/loss records is boring. Wrestling is boring enough as it is now with hardly any characters or personality, lets make it even more dull by having Black against Murphy with the winner elevated to third tier and the loser stays in the fourth tier.
> 
> Who the hell cares? May as well go back to the 60's.
> 
> ...


You've summed up the problem of current day pro-wrestling on the first day of the new decade.

Why do these dumbass promoters think ANYONE will want to watch 2 nobodies have several matches with each other? And like you said, matches that ultimately lead to nowhere. And why do these promoters think anybody who watches WWE/AEW in this decade want to see a sports orientated win/loss culture? Bah. Character/storyline-driven segments is a dead thing it seems like in Pro-wrestling. It's all good introducing a win loss thing, but USE it in storylines.

I want to see Cody attack MJF at his home. I want to see Moxley get arrested for attempting to run over Jericho, break out of jail, come and beat the shit out of IC the same day. I realise this is very attitude-era/MNW orientated but at the end of the day, that was when pro-wrestling ran culture. You could argue that attitude era still is culture right now, with the face of it plastered all over blockbuster movies.

The thing is, Vince realises this because the Lana storyline, although its wrestlecrap, is the most popular storyline in pro-wrestling right now. 


I really blame the internet on this loss of direction. Being part of this echo chamber and hearing the loudest voices from the minority is the reason why pro-wrestling is in the state it is in. If the internet wants workrate, go fucking watch ROH or other independents.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> You've summed up the problem of current day pro-wrestling on the first day of the new decade.
> 
> Why do these dumbass promoters think ANYONE will want to watch 2 nobodies have several matches with each other? And like you said, matches that ultimately lead to nowhere. And why do these promoters think anybody who watches WWE/AEW in this decade want to see a sports orientated win/loss culture? Bah. Character/storyline-driven segments is a dead thing it seems like in Pro-wrestling. It's all good introducing a win loss thing, but USE it in storylines.
> 
> ...


Please no, this is really bad.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> Please no, this is really bad.


that's what made the attitude era culture. not 2 bland wrestlers putting on fIvE StAr matches in the ring.

You liked the Rock, Austin, Mankind, Taker, Kane, HHH, Angle etc right. You must've enjoyed the nWo storyline at least initially right?

Yeah.... You were invested in them because their characters were developed outside of just wrestling matches. In fact, the attitude era was not about workrate. Like i said, you want that go watch ROH.

Austin ran trains on Vince, drove trucks, zambonis, beer trucks etc into the arena, got arrested and still came back and raised hell. HHH turned out to be the mastermind of Austin being run over. HHH was then trampled in a car by Austin. The Rock threw Austin's smoking skull belt into the ocean, as well as Austin himself. There are a TON of segments, vignettes, promos that took place outside of the ring to develop storylines further.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

People bitch because some moves in the ring don't look realistic enought and you want something even less realistic…..


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> People bitch because some moves in the ring don't look realistic enought and you want something even less realistic…..


again, you want workrate and flipping and flopping, go watch ROH or other independents.

mainstream pro-wrestling is in a bad state because of this echo chamber begging for workrate.

Nothing unrealistic about a main being run over. We are in 2020 when civilians are being killed on a daily basis. And not only by each other, but by police as well. But flipping and flopping is less unrealistic than a guy being run over? ok


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> again, *you want workrate and flipping and flopping, go watch ROH or other independents.*
> 
> mainstream pro-wrestling is in a bad state because of this echo chamber begging for workrate.
> 
> Nothing unrealistic about a main being run over. We are in 2020 when civilians are being killed on a daily basis. And not only by each other, but by police as well. *But flipping and flopping is less unrealistic than a guy being run over?* ok


Where and when did i said that ?

There is only 1 match who made me cry because of how good it was : Cody vs Dustin…..far from a flipping and flopping

I have no problem with an angle like that but the guy who get run over should not be back before at least 5-6 months.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> Where and when did i said that ?
> 
> There is only 1 match who made me cry because of how good it was : Cody vs Dustin…..far from a flipping and flopping
> 
> I have no problem with an angle like that but the guy who get run over should not be back before at least 5-6 months.


Austin was out for a year. I understand it was their way of hiding his injury, but why can't WWE do that now instead of just announcing an injury or having the guy disappear quietly? Reigns should've been attacked like Austin was, in order to write him off for Cancer. The internet echo chamber might realise he has cancer, but the majority of viewers wouldn't have known.


And if you re-read my post: I want to see Moxley get arrested for *attempting* to run over Jericho


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> Austin was out for a year. I understand it was their way of hiding his injury, but why can't WWE do that now instead of just announcing an injury or having the guy disappear quietly? Reigns should've been attacked like Austin was, in order to write him off for Cancer. The internet echo chamber might realise he has cancer, but the majority of viewers wouldn't have known.
> 
> 
> And if you re-read my post: *I want to see Moxley get arrested for attempting to run over Jericho*


I think it would be better if Jericho tried to run over Moxley, more fitting for the character.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> I think it would be better if Jericho tried to run over Moxley, more fitting for the character.


You just said you "please no, this is really bad" because it's "unrealistic".

i mean either way, this is what all pro-wrestling companies need. some storytelling.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> You just said you "please no, this is really bad" because it's "unrealistic".
> 
> i mean either way, this is what all pro-wrestling companies need. some storytelling.


No the home invasion thing is really bad.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> To have your entire company based around rankings and win/loss records is boring. Wrestling is boring enough as it is now with hardly any characters or personality, lets make it even more dull by having Black against Murphy with the winner elevated to third tier and the loser stays in the fourth tier.
> 
> Who the hell cares? May as well go back to the 60's.
> 
> ...



I'm struggling to understand how the appearance of a structure to competition disqualifies a promotion from personality and character. Many people enjoy real sports in spite of dearth of personality and character and then appreciate it more when a personality shows up. Wrestling right now has the opposite problem. It's got personality, but nothing for the characters to do when they aren't feuding with each other. (I'm sick of seeing the OC walk around backstage like they're going between classes in middle school, and picking fights.) What type of job pays people to walk around to find reasons to fight? It's stupid.

Maybe because I've never been a WWE guy, but I don't give a crap about a wrestler's "hoes." It's funny, sure, but it's no reason for him to work for a wrestling company, to compete for a title. As far as I'm concerned stuff like that would be better served on a show like BtE. Character and story should be designed to promote matches and get people invested in the show. That's one advantage wrestling has over real sports. But if you don't use that advantage to justify the show's existence, what the heck do you book the show for?


----------



## imthegame19 (Oct 12, 2008)

optikk sucks said:


> that's what made the attitude era culture. not 2 bland wrestlers putting on fIvE StAr matches in the ring.
> 
> You liked the Rock, Austin, Mankind, Taker, Kane, HHH, Angle etc right. You must've enjoyed the nWo storyline at least initially right?
> 
> ...


This.

Now they shouldn't change their match style and give some long matches. But they don't need 5 ten minute plus matches either. You can have say 3 of them and two others around 5 minutes. With promos and storyline angles around the rest of the show.

While they need to cut down the amount of wrestlers they showcase every week. We should see Moxley, Jericho with Innercircle, Omega, Cody, Page, Pac, MJF, Darby Allin and Dustin Rhodes. As the focus of the show week in and week out. We shouldn't see any other singles guys on the show unless they are wrestling one of these guys. But they need to use their stars and even in multiple segments some weeks.

We also shouldn't see woman on Dynamite if she's unranked or they aren't gonna push her as one of those type of five. With segment or match a week for woman. We don't need so many random girls on Dynamite each week. Have a few and do more storyline and angles instead of just matches.


Exactly the same goes for tag division. Focus on Bucks, Lucha Bros, SCU, Santana or Ortiz. Then mix in one of the other teams depending on who your pushing. Again we don't need these teams wrestling each other every week. You can have promos and storylines with them too.

Less is more for a show like this. We shouldn't see any other talent on Dynamite unless they are being pushed as a top 10 for that moment or unless used as enhancement talent. Use Dark to build up people for Dynamite. When they are doing good stuff on there. Then decide to push them. 


But we don't really need to see Luchuaruas(what's point of him having singles matches vs Peter Avalon&Sammy Guevara), Scopio Sky (would title match &feud as tag team champion)or Jungle Boy(two week feud with Jericho then goes back in tag team) get the type of matches they got on Dynamite. If it's just going to lead to them back wrestling in tag team the next week. If they wanna give them singles pushed then that's fine. Other wise they should only wrestle on Dynamite as enhancement talent like Trent is tonight.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> No the home invasion thing is really bad.


it really isn't. Remember Orton HHH home invasion? Shit was literally getting talked about everywhere. It made the story very personal and I was kept entertained and interested because of it.

also the arc around MJF's home being invaded is that he's this rich as fuck guy, lives in a mansion all comfy and secure. his home being invaded is a great way to help progress the storyline. he did that promo in his home (it was a green screen but nonetheless). it furthers the storyline immensely.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> it really isn't. Remember Orton HHH home invasion? Shit was literally getting talked about everywhere. It made the story very personal and I was kept entertained and interested because of it.
> 
> also the arc around MJF's home being invaded is that he's this rich as fuck guy, lives in a mansion all comfy and secure. his home being invaded is a great way to help progress the storyline. he did that promo in his home (it was a green screen but nonetheless). it furthers the storyline immensely.


Someone who break into the house of somebody else to attack him and then is at the show the week after like nothing happened is really not realistic at all.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> Someone who break into the house of somebody else to attack him and then is at the show the week after like nothing happened is really not realistic at all.


im sorry i thought i was watching pro-wrestling LMAO.

did you start watching pro-wrestling from tomorrow?

MJF can talk about having no charges/arrest because he wants to take revenge himself.

it's simple storytelling, it must be lost on you.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

optikk sucks said:


> im sorry i *thought i was watching pro-wrestling LMAO.*
> 
> did you start watching pro-wrestling from tomorrow?
> 
> ...


Then we can use this logic for everything.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

rbl85 said:


> Then we can use this logic for everything.


you can do whatever the fck you want in prowrestling. ask david arquette. it doesn't mean people will willingly watch it.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

DOTL said:


> I'm struggling to understand how the appearance of a structure to competition disqualifies a promotion from personality and character. Many people enjoy real sports in spite of dearth of personality and character and then appreciate it more when a personality shows up. Wrestling right now has the opposite problem. It's got personality, but nothing for the characters to do when they aren't feuding with each other. (I'm sick of seeing the OC walk around backstage like they're going between classes in middle school, and picking fights.) What type of job pays people to walk around to find reasons to fight? It's stupid.
> 
> Maybe because I've never been a WWE guy, but I don't give a crap about a wrestler's "hoes." It's funny, sure, but it's no reason for him to work for a wrestling company, to compete for a title. As far as I'm concerned stuff like that would be better served on a show like BtE. Character and story should be designed to promote matches and get people invested in the show. That's one advantage wrestling has over real sports. But if you don't use that advantage to justify the show's existence, what the heck do you book the show for?


I get what you are saying. Wrestlers fighting each other for no reason and nothing at stake is a bit pointless. 

Thats why we have titles. Something to work towards. But that doesnt always work. Seems to get a shot at the US title you need to have lost your last few matches these days. 

But to go to the other extreme just seems too much. We need proper characters, feuds and storylines for everyone with the aim of fighting for a title. Wrestling has very little personality in 2020.

I cant speak for everyone but I would say most are not even bothered about the match when it comes to wrestling. 

Hogan, Austin, Rock, Cena, Undertaker, Sting etc. Ask a fan to name a memory of that wrestler.

You will get moments as your answer. Slamming Andre, stunning Vince, backstage promos, entrance with the black trenchcoat and bat. Not the 35 minute match where wrestler A beat wrestler B to progress up the ranks. 

Its wrestling, it shouldnt be taken that seriously. Its not real. Why would I care that MJF is rank 6 or 10 unless I want him to be champion? Compare his recent win/loss record. Oh look he has lost his last 3 matches. He is loosing his edge. No, its not real. Its not UFC.


----------



## Benoit's Weight Machine (Dec 28, 2019)

I know this isn't anything that AEW itself is doing wrong but it may be a factor. How much of the audience loss is due to people tuning out once they realized that CM Punk wasn't showing up? 

I really think that Conrad inadvertently did AEW a huge disservice by booking Punk at Starrcast. People got their hopes up and let themselves down. It also may be a coincidence but it seems like any excitement among casuals completely vanished once Punk appeared on Fox.

I personally am not a fan of Punk. I think he is overrated but I don't think you can discount him as a factor in the ratings decline.


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

I will agree that i think the wins lose is pointless. I never really thought much or commented much about it when it was first announced. That being said its not a big deal if they continue to try it for a proper full year. The thing is this will either work or not work. It will either completely make storylines complicated based off whos leading or it could work to make storylines more interesting. 

Reality is in the end no one cares who wins any matches. Wrestling will always be based off story telling, Story development,CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT CHARACTER STORY TELLING. Matches matter when it has lead to something based off story telling that is in the ring and out of the ring. Plus thats another issue is when you put on a match its a story and that is something that is hardly happening at all in AEW. Even look at WCW they had so many types of wrestlers and they always brought storty telling to its matches,That has always been how it is.Sorry didnt mean to yell.

This is something NWA seems to be the only one that gets it. NWA is basing its promotion on the 3 basic things that create a good company. Characters,Promos and story telling with all of that. Hell if you think about wwf in its peak it was not about who won or lost but about what lead up to that match with a story and what lead up to that match is what leads to who wins being exciting.


Real sports dont have story telling,They only have some guys that justhappen to have a lot of charisma


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> I get what you are saying. Wrestlers fighting each other for no reason and nothing at stake is a bit pointless.
> . . .


I don't see how a structured sport setting will take away from anything you mentioned. It's not mutually exclusive to have a show with character and sport. This is something I think needs to at least be attempted before it's assumed not to work or to be uninteresting. This is about the structure and the kayfabe justification of the story, the existence of the characters, and serves as a foundation for all the stuff you're talking about. Without this kayfabe justification, places like WWE are just real organizations housing fake disputes with fake fighting.

And I'm getting kinda tired of hearing how wrestling not being real is some kind of argument against believability. The fakest of the fake worlds need believability of s sort.




shandcraig said:


> . . .
> *Real sports dont have story telling,They only have some guys that justhappen to have a lot of charisma*


*You're definitely wrong here. A quick look at ESPN will show you all of the narratives they spin in attempts to contextualize a game. Look at the TV specials that revolve around the story leading up to a fight in boxing. *

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Building sports kayfabe will not change how wrestlers get over, story telling,or character development. It all just serves as a backdrop and justification for all this stuff. It's designed to make the stories more consistent and believable. You can't say what people care or don't care about in this regard because no one has really committed to the idea long enough to know. In fact, existing evidence shows that people do care enough about wins and losses to get completely turned off on their once favorite wrestlers. Just refer to Undertaker's streak.

Powerr's promos and work center around the titles(i.e, the sports structure of their world). Just look at Tim Storm and Aldis. Their feud revolved around a techical stipulation and Tim wanting to be champion again. It wasn't about Aldis trashing his mother or some other dumb crap like that. All they do is talk about number one contenderships, titles, tournaments, and all that stuff. Aldis acts like a real sports champion in a real sports organization. They do it with character, and they do it with story. A sporting story.

BTW, WWF at it's peak was far from the best content available, even in that same decade, yet alone all of wrestling.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> A fight is a story, but wrestling has always been more than a fight. Otherwise what would be the point of have some matches being more important than others? What's the point of a belt? What's the point of calling it PROFESSIONAL wrestling? Even back in the carny days they had a structured reason to fight. They'd say "my money says your town can't produce a wrestler good enough to beat our guy." And then the crowd would get invested in the guy getting beat.


You are kind of skirting around a good point, but you forgot what you are actually arguing for. You're arguing for a ranking system that locks and limits your stories. I'm certainly not criticizing the prestige of championship belts. If you don't protect your championships then what is the point? What you're going to end up with, however, is an undefeated Orange Cassidy being CLEARLY the top ranked fighter where there are no weight classes, and it being completely ridiculous he is not granted a World Championship match. 

You're setting up straw-men left and right. No one is suggesting that there is no reason to fight. You give people a reason. I specifically said that. You also use psychology to tell a story in the fight. People get sucked into fights and wrestling when it tells a good story. Flair/Steamboat is a perfect example. Look at how they got the fans, originally against him, behind Steamboat. That fight is a story. No one is calling for the abolition of championships, stories, angles, feuds, promos or gimmicks. You just don't need a ranking system on that booking yourself into a corner when you realize you've given someone too many wins, too many losses, etc. Wrestling, more than anything you've said, was always good at choosing _what_ it wanted to emphasize. A ranking system completely removes that control. 



DOTL said:


> 2.44m? Seriously? You do realize that 2.44m is a shadow of the former numbers wrestling used to get even 7 years ago. And my point about people being sophisticated isn't that they are too smart for the loose booking of the WWE, it's that they are savvy enough to be thoroughly invested in a structured wrestling competition in a way that adds to their enjoyment of it. Considering that sports are both more popular and more complicated than wrestling, I don't even see how this is even controversial.


That's irrelevant. My point isn't that WWE is doing better than it ever has. It's about how it's doing about four times better than a show you claim represents the tastes of audiences better. There's no evidence to support that.



DOTL said:


> Everything I say doesn't preclude "wrestling tactics." It just assumes that those tactics will work in conjunction with an actual kayfabe competitive universe instead of just building where dudes walking around backstage aimlessly and fight because they get told to and pretend don't like each other. The reason people use wrestling tactics is because at the end of the day, it's designed to bring people into their world, pick a side, and pay money. It doesn't mean the rules and structure of the event have to disappear. In fact, Mohammad Ali was influenced and influenced wrestlers. And if you don't remember, Ali was a a competitor in a real sport, with rankings and statistics and a governing body. Creating an illusion of sport builds psychology because its builds an actual kayfabe structure for all the feuding, heat, angles, and promos. It's the same old stuff, just actually applied in a consistent, structured, world.


No one is saying the rules and the structure of the event need to disappear. This is another misdirection tactic. I'm saying that your ranking system is ineffective at providing actual drama and that it gets in the way of all those other things. Your heart is in the right place, but your idea is bad. 

That Muhammad Ali point is completely irrelevant and ridiculous in the context of what we're discussing. Because Ali took what he liked from wrestling, and wrestling took what it liked from Ali, they both have to use a ranking system? Bullshit. In fact, the fact that wrestling has largely stayed away from them, and that they usually end up in disaster, is probably a much better case to draw from the similarities _and differences_ between wrestling and boxing. 

No one is arguing against structure. It's just counterproductive to have rigid. 



DOTL said:


> What's really insane is that we're describing ranking competitively in terms of pushes, and heat, and all this wrestling slang when people 40 years ago never described a wrestler gaining momentum that way. They knew what ranking was, they could follow competitions easy enough but the concept of a "push" was foreign to them. Normal people might not be as invested in wrestling as we are, but they're certainly capable of understanding that this guy is competing against this guy because his rank will improve. Doesn't stop people from enjoying boxing or football any.And I propose this because I think people will enjoy it. I find it funny that all of the arguments against this comes from the place of creative and booking and not whether or not the audience will find it engaging. .


I don't think you've fully grasped what we're talking about. We're talking about pushes, but that doesn't mean that audiences who don't think about them in those terms don't see them. Just because Old Gazza down at the pub didn't think "Man, Stone Cold Steve Austin is getting a push!" doesn't mean Austin wasn't getting pushed. I don't understand where you're trying to go with this. 

Everything you just said is, again, completely inherent in the concept of a match. The referee being there, the commentators, the ropes, the presentation, the ring announcing, the selling, the psychology -- that all tells the story of one guy needing to beat another to get further along. You don't need a win-loss record or official ladder displayed to make that more complicated though, lol. Wrestling has worked on everything you're talking about away from that bullshit forever and a day. There's a reason for that. 



DOTL said:


> That's true, but I think you'll find it's harder to get people to care about something like that more consistently if that's all there was.That's why we have belts, 18,000 match varieties, fake commissioners/general managers. Every other show, con, and narrative has to have a plausible world. I don't see why wrestling is any different.The personal story should supplement not replace the competitive structure of the promotion. And you're right. Having a system that works will create something special. Doing nothing is boring.


I don't know where you keep plucking this idea that two guys fighting is boring, but two guys fighting when they've got a number next to their name is _inherently_ interesting. That's very bizarre. 



optikk sucks said:


> that's what made the attitude era culture. not 2 bland wrestlers putting on fIvE StAr matches in the ring.
> 
> You liked the Rock, Austin, Mankind, Taker, Kane, HHH, Angle etc right. You must've enjoyed the nWo storyline at least initially right?
> 
> ...


Some things work better in their time. Returning to that sort of stuff won't necessarily help in 2020. But you need to find something that plays on the emotional zeitgeist. It's not a win-loss record system, I can tell you that. 



Benoit's Weight Machine said:


> I know this isn't anything that AEW itself is doing wrong but it may be a factor. How much of the audience loss is due to people tuning out once they realized that CM Punk wasn't showing up?
> 
> I really think that Conrad inadvertently did AEW a huge disservice by booking Punk at Starrcast. People got their hopes up and let themselves down. It also may be a coincidence but it seems like any excitement among casuals completely vanished once Punk appeared on Fox.
> 
> I personally am not a fan of Punk. I think he is overrated but I don't think you can discount him as a factor in the ratings decline.


Good thought! Makes sense to me. I don't think it helps that he clearly chooses WWE too. That perception change, given the history between the two, certainly can't be ignored as a influencer. And there the quiet little promises that have been broken. Women will be equal to men? Nah. Tag teams matter? Bullshit. There was that UK TV deal Cody tried to spin. Referee issues were supposed to be cleared up. Cody promised. There have been at least two bait-and-switches. Cody talks about AEW as "The Ellis Island of wrestling," but no one has jumped since they started. Wait, except for Kris Statlander. 

I only link them to your Punk point because I think fans, whether told directly or not, feel like they have been promised things and those things have not been delivered. That will affect how seriously people take you. 



DOTL said:


> I don't see how a structured sport setting will take away from anything you mentioned. It's not mutually exclusive to have a show with character and sport. This is something I think needs to at least be attempted before it's assumed not to work or to be uninteresting. This is about the structure and the kayfabe justification of the story, the existence of the characters, and serves as a foundation for all the stuff you're talking about. Without this kayfabe justification, places like WWE are just real organizations housing fake disputes with fake fighting.
> 
> And I'm getting kinda tired of hearing how wrestling not being real is some kind of argument against believability. The fakest of the fake worlds need believability of s sort.
> 
> ...


Here are some reasons a ranking system is a bad idea: 

1. It forces matches. PAC has been relatively protected, so he's got an excellent win-loss record. So now you need to give him an AEW World Title match. That means you're running heel versus heel, which means you've got to find a creative way to not blow off anybody's heat. This is booking yourself into a corner. If you don't keep track of the ranking system, you can protect PAC, but he doesn't need to be shoehorned into a match with another top heel. 

2. If you start pushing someone as undefeated, given the nature of the beast, how long is it until you need to beat them in order to not give them a win-loss record so disproportionate to the 50/50 club that it makes no sense they are not getting title shots? This is booking yourself into a corner. If you don't focus on the win-loss system, a wrestler can be beating jobbers and they can talk about how much he wins without throwing them under the bus. 

3. 50/50 guys getting title shots exposes the ranking system, as well as the parity of your wrestlers, and draws attention to the exact same problem WWE has. You can't be all "we're long-term planners" when you resort to the same 50/50 bullshit. Emi Sakura got a title shot with a 50/50 record. The Lucha Bros. were something like 7-6 last time I checked. This means you've either got to push a bunch of fucking mediocre wrestlers, or you've got to throw them random and meaningless wins to corrupt other records. 

4. A 50/50 record, given the nature of things, decreases your mystique. Sorry, Pentagon, but it's hard to give a shit about you when I know you're just as likely to get beat up as you are to beat someone up. 

5. Given the amount of matches wrestlers work, compared to other sports, it makes a win-loss record look ridiculous and inflated. It looks ridiculous when a wrestler has something like 29 wins in a year, but it also looks ridiculous when you've got 14 losses or whatever. You got beat up that much and were fine? Those matches might happen anyway, but you don't draw attention to the quality by not _emphasizing it in their fucking intro_. 

6. Wrestlers getting a push -- a simple streak of wins -- are inherently going to be compared. Let's say AEW wants to give two big pushes to Wardlow and, fuck it, Ryback? I don't even care. So they start going on rampages. Suddenly one is going to look inherently inferior to the other when they lose. Also, it takes away from telling that story when you have _the exact same story_ on the show. The difference between that and doing it without the win-loss records is that you don't consciously invite the comparisons between two pushed acts. 

7. In order to protect main event acts, newer acts will have to pop their loss cherry early. You can't have someone going 10 wins in a row and being the only guy to do it if they're lower on the card than Cody Rhodes. Therefore, you're going to have to cut off undercard pushes early. This is insanity and completely counterproductive to the idea that they are going to enhance young talent. You are creating a scenario where their records need to be squashed in order to not overexpose them. Without that emphasis, they could be pushed and visibly win _all the time_, but not have a fucking graphic telling you they are better than the rest of the roster. 

8. A push later is going to be compared to a push earlier. Say you did want to push a monster in a few years. Or a winner. The records you create now are going to cast shadows on any of your intentions later. Let's say Wardlow gets a push now. He beats 16 guys in a row. Jeff Cobb debuts later, beats 7. It invites you to compare. Without the fucking actual record, you can make it _feel_ unique and different, and you can pull triggers when you're ready, instead of being a slave to your own system. 

9. You become a slave to the numbers. WWE fell into this with The Undertaker's streak and how they treat WrestleMania wins and losses. Numbers become sacred cows, streaks become valued too much or not enough. You think if they want to promote Wardlow as the guy with the streak they're going to give someone else a streak? You think that if no one wins 16 matches in a year, that suddenly doesn't begin to influence booking? Some things are just better to forget about. 

10. It detracts from the actual reasons people are fighting. Stories are best when succinct and focused. Clear motivations. A win-loss record, for shit that matters, is going to create a layer of tension that can potentially distract from the match. Whether it's someone loss record when the fans are supposed to be buying them as a bad-ass, or whether it's just splitting focus. If you don't need it in a story, it shouldn't be in a story. Redundancy is one of the biggest sins of writing. You can have winners, losers, contenders and champions without a redundant ranking system. 

11. It's messy as fuck. Like an 11-point list, it's just going to get messy. You have to split your plates, and when things get changed, you can't just switch things up. Say you need a new challenger because a contender's hurt, suddenly you can't just do an angle without it feeling underwhelming _because of those fucking numbers_. You will be balancing wins, losses and keeping track of stats you really don't need to. It's not smart, it's just making things harder. 

So there are 11 good reasons -- many of them multi-faceted -- that explain why a ranking system is counterproductive to a simple, focused, straight-forward and effective wrestling product.


----------



## The Dude (Jan 1, 2020)

This is the best discussion I’ve seen regarding this topic so props to all involved.

I too had high hopes for AEW and truly want them to develop into a legit big time company that’s competitive to WWE. And I too have been disappointed. I’ll just echo some of the things already said and maybe add some new thoughts—-

-First and foremost they need a writer or two. I reject the notion that wrestlers can be writers... we’re seeing that happen now. And the result is sloppiness, bad to no storytelling, holes in the show, bad formatting, etc. A few writers can work with Cody and Khan to develop an intriguing, entertaining show within their framework.

-Along with having writers the show must be episodic. You can have Darby Allin challenging for the belt one week and then being irrelevant the next week. This is exactly why wrestling “bookers” have no business booking a weekly prime time TV show.

-Get rid of Excalibur. He Screams Indy and cheapens the product.

-Every match should have either a reason for happening or video package Showcasing the talent’s characters. There should never be random matches especially those that go an ungodly 25 minutes. The videos from the Road To series should be on the TV show.

-Your top talent should be on TV every week otherwise they lose momentum.

-They desperately need to get rid of those acts that simply embarrass the company. Emi Sakura, Marko Stunt, Orange Cassidy, among others, including those that are there simply because they’re buddies with those in charge, like Nakazawa.

-Focus on being different than WWE. Their storylines are cartoony, AEW’s should be adult oriented. They should really look at using the “7 deadly sins” to focus their storytelling around and give it an adult edge... envy, gluttony, greed or avarice, lust, pride, sloth, and wrath.

-For the love of god, stop being so married to workrate. Most people don’t give a crap about a 25 minute flip flop classic or how many stars it gets. Stop playing to the niche and start focusing on gaining the majority.

I believe they can turn this thing around but it’s gonna take them changing their ways and stop being married to the ideology of some of the people in charge.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I think there is merit to what you are saying, but I would suggest a booker as opposed to a writer. Someone who actually knows how to book for wrestling audiences. I would give Jericho and Cody input, but would probably hand it over to JR.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

rbl85 said:


> People bitch because some moves in the ring don't look realistic enought and you want something even less realistic…..


That's not true. People are happy for companies like Lucha Underground to be unrealistic, but don't tell us you're going to be realistic and then give us 4 footers fighting Lucha Ninjas and getting in any attack whatsoever. Give us an undead monster who doesn't feel pain but don't give us two brothers who can fall from a ladder and land badly but forget about that pain after three minutes of "selling". This is really simple stuff to understand if you're not trying to twist things.


----------



## rbl85 (Nov 21, 2017)

Cult03 said:


> That's not true. People are happy for companies like Lucha Underground to be unrealistic, but don't tell us you're going to be realistic and then give us 4 footers fighting Lucha Ninjas and getting in any attack whatsoever. Give us an undead monster who doesn't feel pain but don't give us two brothers who can fall from a ladder and land badly but forget about that pain after three minutes of "selling". This is really simple stuff to understand if you're not trying to twist things.


By people i was talking about persons on this forum


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I don't think this deserves its own thread, but I've been listening to the Jim Cornette omnibuses as background noise while I work/exercise lately. There are some good conversations with Dave Meltzer and JR on there. Brian Last is a cheeky little fuck though, lol: Every time I randomly click somewhere in the videos, the conversation is _really_ ironic. 

- I've heard Meltzer talking about how the newness of a company is their best chance to strike. Very different to the people who raise arguments that "they're new, so it doesn't matter" or "they've got growing pains." This was in regards to TNA blowing its early chances with the fans. The exact quote is something like "They've missed their chance to make a good first impression."

- JR basically predicts the future of NXT. 

- JR criticizes guys for working too fast, and calls them assholes for using that style. Says he's going to bury them on commentary because they need to learn the trade better. Essentially. 

I think these are complete collections, so it's not like opinions have been cherry-picked. But it's kind of cute how it betrays a bias that both would probably have against the company if they didn't have a biased perspective on it (for different reasons). I genuinely don't think the idea is to bury them, but in a year where AEW has been the story, it's a nice little cap to Corny's criticisms to show these other famed commentators kind of backing him up in different contexts.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> You are kind of skirting around a good point, but you forgot what you are actually arguing for. You're arguing for a ranking system that locks and limits your stories. I'm certainly not criticizing the prestige of championship belts. If you don't protect your championships then what is the point? What you're going to end up with, however, is an undefeated Orange Cassidy being CLEARLY the top ranked fighter where there are no weight classes, and it being completely ridiculous he is not granted a World Championship match.
> 
> You're setting up straw-men left and right. No one is suggesting that there is no reason to fight. You give people a reason. I specifically said that. You also use psychology to tell a story in the fight. People get sucked into fights and wrestling when it tells a good story. Flair/Steamboat is a perfect example. Look at how they got the fans, originally against him, behind Steamboat. That fight is a story. No one is calling for the abolition of championships, stories, angles, feuds, promos or gimmicks. You just don't need a ranking system on that booking yourself into a corner when you realize you've given someone too many wins, too many losses, etc. Wrestling, more than anything you've said, was always good at choosing _what_ it wanted to emphasize. A ranking system completely removes that control.
> 
> ...


I started to argue point for point, but it was time consuming, so I will address a few specific things, summarize where you get get things wrong, and then address your list. 

1. My point on Ali was lost on you. My point is that he was able to integrate wrestling tactics into his sport without it taking away from his sport's popularity, a sport with a longer tradition and more snobs than wrestling ever had. The idea that adding a bit more competitive context will ruin something as creatively free as wrestling has no evidence just like adding showmanship into boxing bore no evidence of ruining that sport. 

2. This idea that its better to not add a record or ranking system because no one has done it to much success yet is a moot point. Wrestling was filled with innovations, innovations we take for granted now (or in some cases drop) that no one tried in earnest before. But tell Mondt, Inoki, and even McMahon, tell those guys who've had their own spin on wrestling that what's modern has to be a template for the future. Wrestling is both less structured and less popular than it was 45 years ago. It should have increased in popularity as kayfabe governing bodies fell away, as rule books stopped being printed, as dirt sheets leaked. But what you find is there's no correlation between a loosening of structure and popularity. Wrestling was at its height when there were big personalities, but so was boxing, basketball, and any other spectator sport. this was true in the NWA days and it's true now. The point is quite divorced from how a show can and should be presented. 

3. I'm not misleading anyone because I'm not trying to win an argument or argue for a particular record keeping structure. I'm merely defending the concept ranking systems and record keeping of a sort. So any instance you make of "my system" is a strawman.

4. WWE is losing ratings bad, so I would be loathed to use that as credit of sort that their way is better than anyone's. AEW is a new brand that has to plead its case. What will WWE's excuse be when its flagship shows drop to AEW's level? BTW I never said that AEW is a product is "what people want." Don't know where that came from.

Now to summarize where I think you're getting things wrong. Firstly, you're confusing ring psychology for an overarching angle. The weakness of the system you're defending is that its so heavily fued-centric guys have to start feuding with other guys right off of coming off an injury. You know what would be better and more logical than that? Have the guy try to rank in the competition. 

What you see as a limit on creativity, I see as holding bookers to more long term planning, accountability for their angles, and giving wrestlers something do when they aren't mad because someone stepped on their new boots. You can still book your angles, have your characters, have your heat, your rivalries, and if you want, idiots in beer trucks, but it will all be done in a kayfabe competitive context. Otherwise, what's the friken point of them being there? To feud? Feuds are angles and were never meant to take over for the appearance of an actual event. 

The details can be worked on, experimented on, but we like talking about TV so much, let me tell you what doesn't look good on Tv. Having zero kayfabe structure for the fictional sports body these people are supposed to be contracted to. It looks cheesier than wrestling needs to be and companies' only get away with it because kayfabe is dead and they're riding on the bottom end of AE ratings. 

Got a problem with long-term ranking.Fine. Rank for the PPV card. Rank for qualification for a yearly tournament. Do something. I'm sick of being sold that these guys are competitors yet they don't compete. The difficulties of one system over another is no excuse for not trying to implement one.

Fighting for fighting's sake is boring. This isn't even controversial. This isn't about numbers being next to their name. This is about these wrestlers having a goal and a motivation that makes sense for a competitive organization.

This is what you guys are missing. The numbers aren't for the people. The numbers are for the characters. The characters caring about their numbers makes it interesting for the audience. This basic reality does not preclude all the other dumb crap a person might want their wrestler to fight about. It's job is to serve as a basic, fundamental, motivation for going in a ring. That's all. 

Now to the list:

1.You use the word creative. That's an interesting choice of words. Who would have thought forcing Creative to be creative was a bad thing? I get your point, but I don't see that as a reason against a record system. I see it as a reason not to implement an incomplete one. Simply being the number one in a rank shouldn't be the only reason a person challenges for the belt. even real life boxing doesn't work that way. Also just because two guys are heels doesn't mean there can't be a match. If match schedules are kept clinical in kayfabe, and there's good story behind it(see, you can use story in this system) I don't see how a person can't get into a heel versus heel match. Just like you can have two faces have friendly bouts. Hey and if the idea of heel versus heel is so bad, book a way for a face to take his spot. 


2. If you're booking a run of the mill undefeated run,they need a title shot eventually. otherwise what's the point? That's true if you have a record or not. Secondly, streaks pose problems in general. Like if you book a streak how long until they run through top baby-faces? If the point of a streak is that you're beating different people. This is why Sting had to eat a jackhammer.Thirdly, how is this a problem if records are wiped?

3. This is an issue of not having a set purpose for record keeping. If they were kept for a tournament, or some sort of 1# contenders match, you'd have a built in reason why being 1# doesn't guarantee you a shot. If titles were defended at regulated intervals that would give them enough time to book a such an event before for a title defense. And I'm not sure why everyone not in line for this need to be 50/50. You simply have people rank in accordance to their importance on the card. Why is someone you never intend on pushing winning matches? This is the exact same way things would be booked without a record system. 

4. Maybe. But you know what else kills mystique? Never getting a title match. Look at Strowman. he's a monster and is nowhere near as big as he should be because he rarely challenges. Why the heck not? He wins a lot, so much that you needn't a record to know that. it's obvious that he doesn't win "because he's not getting the "push." Lack of a commitment to kayfabe creates a mountain of problems like that. Penta may be suffering, but all that can be fixed in the kayfabe world with a change in his character's attitude. Strowman doesn't have that luxury because kayfabe already has him on the mountain top. The only thing keeping him from taking that brass ring is a shoot. 

5.This is an aesthetic non-argument. if it becomes an issue, just hide their overall record, or use their win percentage. 

6. This is a stretch. A guy who loses isn't streaking. What matters is what people think when they aren't losing. People have a sour taste in their mouth about undertakes WM streak. We don't even remember the number anymore. 

7. Easy fix.Have a probationary period. If the record is there for an event, why would a newbie even rank in the first place? Throw some exhibitions at them. If they're new, the crowd can't get behind them without winning anyway. Just control how they win. Also, what's wrong with weighted victories? The record doesn't have to tell the whole story. What matters is the ranking is sold to the audience. If you just throw numbers up, you're not doing the complete job.

8.This is another stretch. What matters in a streak is that guys are winning. Also, I suggested they should make special distinctions for streaks. All that being said, what's wrong with streaks casting shadows? Those comparisons can be grounds for in story rivalries and angles. It's funny.You say the benefit to having no record is that streaks won't effect character in the long term, yet you say that having no record will also make streaks feel different. So, which is it?

Personally, I think the second point is false and the first point is closer to the mark, but just not a bad thing as you make it out to be. Just ask Ryback. He was compared to Goldberg because of his streak, just as I'd assume any long term streak would be. That's because story context makes streaks feel unique or hacky, not the ability to hide the numbers. The fact that you can qualify a push and use it to build character is a friken brilliant thing, if you think about it.

9. Undertakers issue wasn't numbers. Undertakers issue was that he was the only one whose win loss record mattered over the course of how many years? They made it a huge deal because there was nothing else like it. A guy running a streak up for a few shows leading up to a PPV just isn't the same. And if streaks are accounted for in the system, so what? That means huge streaks will become rare, as they should be.

10. Do you know what your doing? Before I get to that, I must say. I have yet to see a wrestling promotion not deliver Ls to their supposed tough guys. Stop pretending this is unique to a company that has a record.And to rebut your point further, is any of this less distracting than so called champs getting squashed and then never addressing that on the show after or accounting for character at all? Second, it's literally impossible to have a motivation for every match when motivation is tied to feuding and feuding alone. And I know you're not advocating for that, but that's the consequence of your approach to storytelling,whether you know it or not. The reason McMahon has guys fight 100 million times before their ppv bout is because the wrestlers have no reason to exist outside of the damn feud. They aren't characters. And they have no real story.

Storytelling 101. Every character has to be proactive. They have to WANT something. And waiting for Bubba to spit in your eye so you can care about the championship isn't wanting anything. It's passive writing and its bad in every storytelling circle, especially wrestling. If people have trouble understanding that a guy wants to qualify for a championship AND kick the butt ofa guy he hates, then I feel bad for them. 

So I ask again. Do you know what you're doing? You're literally arguing that DEPTH is redundant. 

11. What's messy is what wrestling stories do now. Randomly pushing people they want, finding out the crowd isn't behind that person and then pushing one they think the crowd is behind. Having one boring ass match after another to justify an underwhelming feud. Add to that a still very real vulnerability to injuries, a still very real slavery to merch sales, still very real limit to who you can feud against whom because of the size of your roster or who's on top.No accountability in the story, and a system that excuses lazy ass writing.

How hard it is is how hard you want it to be. if one thing isn't practical, come up with something else. If you feel too restricted, keep the rank to certain times of the year. but at the end of the day, it's all about serving kayfabe. And your system of a straight forward style already does a pisspoor job of it. And I can see why. Half of your points advocate for the bookers ability to make people forget angles, NOT plan ahead, and not have honest non-passive motivations/goals for so-called PROFESSIONAL wrestlers. 

This is why these stories dont grab anyone anymore. There is no story so much as half-assed excuses for guys to wrestle.

Booking a show with consistency, an actual account for both the future and the prospect of injury, and holding yourself to the rules of the world YOU made is hard. But guess what? That's called writing.


----------



## Hangman (Feb 3, 2017)

Oh boy where do I think AEW are going wrong? 

Riho as champion. 
Best friends holding hands. 
Little dog pockets and his stupid shit. 
Anything involving Sonny Kiss. 
Too many tag matches. The tag team division is not a draw no matter how much y'all pretend it is. 
Darby Alan's skateboard shtick. 
Young Bucks doing flippy shit every two seconds. 
Kenny Jazz hands jobbing himself into oblivion. 
Lack of mid card championship. 
Wardlow relegated to silent henchman in a suit. The guy should be squashing jobbers not holding mjfs purse. 
Moxley not being world champion. 
Moxley not squashing these jobbers in a minute. (would Steve Austin have taken 15 minutes to beat one half of the hand holders? No. So why should Mox?)
Lack of on air commissioner, you need someone making matches. 
Ditch Excalibur and have Tazz full time. Ex has had his chance. 
Put the gold on Nyla and book Britt as an underdog.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

Benoit's Weight Machine said:


> I know this isn't anything that AEW itself is doing wrong but it may be a factor. How much of the audience loss is due to people tuning out once they realized that CM Punk wasn't showing up?
> 
> I really think that Conrad inadvertently did AEW a huge disservice by booking Punk at Starrcast. People got their hopes up and let themselves down. It also may be a coincidence but it seems like any excitement among casuals completely vanished once Punk appeared on Fox.
> 
> I personally am not a fan of Punk. I think he is overrated but I don't think you can discount him as a factor in the ratings decline.


I've said this a couple times in a couple different topics so I completely agree. I would bet that they lost a good 200k-300k when they realized he wasn't coming. I can't prove it but when there was a lot of hype coming in that he would join and Bucks are on video saying stuff like "No CM Punk will NOT play The Librarian!" It set up a false hope for a lot of people that he was on board. Granted they never flat out said "CM Punk is ALL IN!" but they definitely are responsible for some or most of the people thinking he was signing or had signed with them. DIck move but good for getting eyeballs to check out your product and at least give it a chance.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

DOTL said:


> I started to argue point for point, but it was time consuming, so I will address a few specific things, summarize where you get get things wrong, and then address your list.
> 
> 1. My point on Ali was lost on you. My point is that he was able to integrate wrestling tactics into his sport without it taking away from his sport's popularity, a sport with a longer tradition and more snobs than wrestling ever had. The idea that adding a bit more competitive context will ruin something as creatively free as wrestling has no evidence just like adding showmanship into boxing bore no evidence of ruining that sport.
> 
> ...


Okay, I agree with a few of your points. But how can you ever book on the fly? 

So you dont really have to have the champion as rank 1 or 2 and the top challengers in the top 5 but surely it helps? Otherwise the rankings are redundant. 

Say someone gets majorily over in the midcard but their ranking and win/loss record isnt great. 

It happened with Bryan. It happened with Kofi. Plans are changed on the fly. 6 months before the last Wrestlemania I really doubt the plan was to put the title on Kofi. 

There would be no suprise title changes. You can see the rankings and see the potential feuds and matches for weeks in advance. You can see that Omega is way down the rankings. No way is he winning the title anytime soon. 

Say Christoper Daniels gets majorly over but has spent the last year jobbing in the midcard and tag team division. What do you do? Boost his ranking with wins against other midcard acts? For how long? He is hot right now. It'll take 6 months to rehab his rankings, in the meantime he has gone cold and the fans now love Spears. Rinse and repeat. 

Wrestling is a never ending book with chapters constantly added on the fly. Not pre written months in advance. 

What happens with injuries? Deaths? Retirements? Switching to WWE? 

You've spent 6 months building up Omega to challenge Moxley for the title. Youve spent months giving him wins to move him up the rankings. He then decides to join WWE, retire, breaks his neck. What do you do? Give the shot to PAC because he is next in line?


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> Okay, I agree with a few of your points. But how can you ever book on the fly?
> 
> So you dont really have to have the champion as rank 1 or 2 and the top challengers in the top 5 but surely it helps? Otherwise the rankings are redundant.
> 
> ...



1. I believe that if ranking is multifaceted and becomes important mostly for specific events and not just the title picture as a whole, that will give the booker less susceptibility to the reasons why you'd need short term solutions in the first place. In real boxing there's a lot of politics. If bookers want some leeway, they can come up with some work in their kayfabe backstage politics. Difference being, whenever they make something up, it will have to make sense for the story as they've established and not be some Wizard of Oz style BS.

2. In Boxing champs aren't ranked at all. This makes sense because ranks are used to determine who, and this is the important part, has the best CASE for a title shot. Why does the title holder need to make his case for something he already has?

3. Someone in that position is probably an up and comer and won't be booked to win a championship immediately anyway. You gotta have someone to job, even in high profile matches. If they are super over, book them like a star even if they lose.

4. Bryan's wasn't so much a surprise for anyone paying attention. His chant got over because of an unfair squash. Kofi got over purely for the way he was booked, so that wasn't much of a surprise either. But on the point of surprises, I've noticed, most people that get suddenly over have a period where that heat has to be cultivated. Take Becky Lynch. She was getting over after her heel turn, but exploded after getting punched in the face. This means she hadn't reached her potential until then. If bookers see someone getting over, they just need to keep that in mind for the next story arc. No need to rush it.

5. I don't see this as a bad thing. I think a "surprise" title change is the result of opaque booking. But if you must have surprises, have the champ choose to give people title shots who normally wouldn't be in the running for some character reason. Heck, that's the plot of Rocky.

6. Like I said, I'm an advocate for seasonal rankings, accounting for streaks, weighing victories and kayfabe backstage politics,and even the idea of a champ putting his belt on the line for political reasons. There are a host of creative ways to capitalize on new heat. This type of stuff happens in real combat sports.

7. Tell that to Gedo. Tell that to Heyman. Tell that to Bischof(at least for the Sting storyline). Vince McMahon may book things the hour before the show,but that's just Vince McMahon, not the rule. Long term booking doesn't mean you write things in stone or have no contingencies. But all wrestling needs some long term goal.

8. This is true regardless of the company. Imagine if Cena got injured lifting weights before he fought the Rock. The difference, however, in a ranked system is you can know in advance who will take who's place. And no one can just up and switch companies. There are contracts. Only an idiot wouldn't account for the contract in their long term planning.

9 See the above point.


----------



## The Dude (Jan 1, 2020)

The Wood said:


> I think there is merit to what you are saying, but I would suggest a booker as opposed to a writer. Someone who actually knows how to book for wrestling audiences. I would give Jericho and Cody input, but would probably hand it over to JR.


I’d respectfully disagree with this. I don’t think you “book” a two hour live prime time show. I think that kind of show needs to be written. And I think they’ve BEEN trying to book it which is the issue.

I think you have a writer that understands television format and television writing inside and out and you have them work with a wrestling mind like JR or Cody.


----------



## Saintpat (Dec 18, 2013)

The Wood said:


> You are kind of skirting around a good point, but you forgot what you are actually arguing for. You're arguing for a ranking system that locks and limits your stories. I'm certainly not criticizing the prestige of championship belts. If you don't protect your championships then what is the point? What you're going to end up with, however, is an undefeated Orange Cassidy being CLEARLY the top ranked fighter where there are no weight classes, and it being completely ridiculous he is not granted a World Championship match.
> 
> You're setting up straw-men left and right. No one is suggesting that there is no reason to fight. You give people a reason. I specifically said that. You also use psychology to tell a story in the fight. People get sucked into fights and wrestling when it tells a good story. Flair/Steamboat is a perfect example. Look at how they got the fans, originally against him, behind Steamboat. That fight is a story. No one is calling for the abolition of championships, stories, angles, feuds, promos or gimmicks. You just don't need a ranking system on that booking yourself into a corner when you realize you've given someone too many wins, too many losses, etc. Wrestling, more than anything you've said, was always good at choosing _what_ it wanted to emphasize. A ranking system completely removes that control.
> 
> ...


Some people have also said ‘well record isn’t the be-all, end-all, there’s quality of wins too.’ But how is beating Omega a quality win if he’s losing all the time? Just because he’s an EVP? Because he was big in Japan?


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Saintpat said:


> Some people have also said ‘well record isn’t the be-all, end-all, there’s quality of wins too.’ But how is beating Omega a quality win if he’s losing all the time? Just because he’s an EVP? Because he was big in Japan?


Simply, yes. Being a former IWGP Heavyweight CHAMPION, the only gaijin winner of the G1 and the current AAA champion should count for something. Only WWE can afford to pretend the outside wrestling world doesn't exist.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> I started to argue point for point, but it was time consuming, so I will address a few specific things, summarize where you get get things wrong, and then address your list.
> 
> 1. My point on Ali was lost on you. My point is that he was able to integrate wrestling tactics into his sport without it taking away from his sport's popularity, a sport with a longer tradition and more snobs than wrestling ever had. The idea that adding a bit more competitive context will ruin something as creatively free as wrestling has no evidence just like adding showmanship into boxing bore no evidence of ruining that sport.
> 
> ...


1. Yes, there is plenty of evidence. Look at _every ranking system ever utilized in wrestling including the one in AEW right now_. You are still a slave to a system that invites fans to criticize your booking. It is needlessly masochistic. 

2. No, it's not a moot point. It's a perfectly valid one. Stop trying to make things more complicated than they are. 

3. Bullshit, you're here discussing ranking systems. I am telling you they are rubbish. 

4. My point isn't to defend WWE's ratings. I think their product sucks. My point is that they are still miles more popular than this new promotion with a ranking system that has already lost about half its regular viewers. So much for one being more interesting than the other. You're just asserting that like it's fact, but there is no evidence to back up your claim that people go ga-ga for ranks. 

Ugh, just like the JR thing, you're not going to get it, because you're stuck in this mode where you think you get what selling is, or what building something up is, or what anything is, and it justifies your own line of thinking, but there's actually no justification for that line of thinking other than you think it, and when someone explains to you otherwise, you just go back to your line of thinking. 

*Logic is good. That doesn't mean you need rankings. Stop trying to justify them as synonymous when they are not.*

Good way to segue into the other numbers. Again, you just like making things more complicated than they are:

1. Because it makes it fucking harder and books you into a fucking corner. You can't have a ranking system without addressing it, which is going to get in the way of your organic personal grudges. You then have an elephant in the room at all times. Why would you invite that into your life unless you are a moron or a masochist? Real simple rule of booking someone once told me: Book what you want people to see. Don't book what you don't want them to see. Sometimes you won't want them to see the rankings. That is inevitable. So. Don't. Book. It. 

2. You completely missed the point with this by going into a discussion about streaks. Nice time to derail a point. You don't always want a streak to result in a title shot, no. Sometimes you just want to see if someone gets over at a certain level, or create a decent story in the middle. This is common sense. You're arguing for the sake of arguing here, and did nothing to address the actual point about streaks.

3. I zoned out reading this point. You think this is inherently more interesting than two people fighting? Yikes. I think you're going on about record keeping? Why create another job that is going to require time, resources, attention to detail and, again, _make your job producing a wrestling show so much fucking harder?_

4. I don't know or care about your Strowman example. WWE is lost on me. It wouldn't matter if they had a ranking system or not. That's not going to make me care. Again, you seem to be making an argument for logic and progression, which does not necessitate a ranking system. You're always making that final leap without ever giving a good reason as to why it is necessary. And you keep going on about motivations -- yes, GREAT! You get it! Then you go on to rankings. No! Stop! You've gone too far! 

5. No, it's not a non-argument. _It shouldn't become a problem in the first place._ Why would you do that to yourself? And you don't fool anyone by hiding statistics, because they'll realize you are hiding statistics. And if you have to hide the statistics, what is the point of promoting statistics? And, by the way _emphasizing the ones you want is exactly my fucking point_. Nice of you to come around on that. 

6. Don't even know what you're replying to here. I'll just assume it was a smokescreen to distract from an actual point I made. 

7. Again, I got bored reading this. I thought you said this shit makes fighting more interesting. Noooooope. What's wrong with booking a match between two people with a reason to fight without any of those unnecessary bells and whistles? Nothing. 

8. You just basically conceded my point. What matters is that they are winning, not the number. Thank you! Fuck. It's called a push. Back to basics. 

9. Again, you completely missed the point. I could go into a giant rant about Taker's streak, the good and the bad. If you're trying to say they made a huge deal because there was nothing else like it, then that defeats your argument for records for everyone. If you want to say that it didn't influence how they booked in a negative way, I'll say you are wrong. Either way, you're proving a separate point about how these things cannibalize your product. 

10. What the fuck are you even arguing here? I'm not saying guys shouldn't lose, ffs. I'm saying that recording a tough guy's losses and revealing to people he has a 50/50 record when you might not want him presented that way is fucking stupid. And it is. You don't do it. And no, saying he wins "50% of the time" isn't going to work there, champ. And I'm not defending any other shitty bad booking practice in another company. I am focusing on THIS bad booking practice. Stop trying to derail things. It's fine for tough guys to lose, but you need to work out how and you need to work out how to either heat them back up, protect their heat, or not constantly drill people over the head with it if you want them to forget. A ranking system and a win-loss record just complicates that mess. 

11. I'm not arguing against any of that. You're again just trying to throw a smoke bomb and suggest I'm high. I'm all for better stories. I'm all for giving people reasons. I'm all for blood feuds, angles and promos. Fuck off trying to spin it like I'm not because it's the only chance you have to make your case. What I'm saying is that a win-loss record complicates the most direct way to tell stories. Wrestler A is pissed off with Wrestler B and they want to fight. I don't think you'll find that people find that more boring than wrestler seeded #23 going against the guy from division 2 ranked #6. There are better ways to tell that story without explaining why the guy with #23 ranking should be taken seriously in the first place in the world of professional wrestling. Fucking cut it out with that noise. That might be your opinion, but it's got no evidence to support it, and common sense it just makes things harder and more confusing.


----------



## Saintpat (Dec 18, 2013)

DOTL said:


> Simply, yes. Being a former IWGP Heavyweight CHAMPION, the only gaijin winner of the G1 and the current AAA champion should count for something. Only WWE can afford to pretend the outside wrestling world doesn't exist.


Your post only underscores how ridiculous his booking in AEW has been.

But if he’s win one/lose one in AEW, basically every other person he faces (including CIMA) gets a huge, quality win. At some point his booking has to match what he WAS for him to be considered to be a top tier guy in AEW.

I mean, you can be a great Japanese baseball player and win every award and honor there and if you come to the Major Leagues and bat .200 you’re not a great major leaguer.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Saintpat said:


> Your post only underscores how ridiculous his booking in AEW has been.
> 
> But if he’s win one/lose one in AEW, basically every other person he faces (including CIMA) gets a huge, quality win. At some point his booking has to match what he WAS for him to be considered to be a top tier guy in AEW.
> 
> I mean, you can be a great Japanese baseball player and win every award and honor there and if you come to the Major Leagues and bat .200 you’re not a great major leaguer.


You're speaking sense, but DOTL will not grasp this point. That's the problem with displaying win/loss records. There was a time where you could get away with a big name dropping wins, but if it happens too much, especially if it is recorded and displayed in a record, then it dilutes the meaning. 

If AEW makes a deal with New Japan, my guess is that it will largely favor New Japan, creatively. You might see Kenny Omega get some wins teaming with Kota Ibushi, but when they have a singles match, Ibushi will win. Okada might not drop a single fall while he is there, and if they run Okada vs. Omega V, I'm pretty sure Okada will win that too. Some lower grade New Japan guys and some young lions might drop matches. It's part of their humbling process.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Yeah. I expect a working relationship to heavily favor NJPW.


----------



## Chan Hung (Dec 28, 2011)

My main gripe is most matches are all 20 fucking minutes. AEW does do some short ones, which are great! But my God do they all have to be long as fuck. A guy like Mox shouldnt take 20 minutes to beat Trent, sorry. Overall AEW is doing well, but that is one pet peeve i have, is the matches are often too long when some could be shorter. (For the record, i don't mind 20 min matches but the flow needs to be better..example...1st match...5 min.....middle of night..10 min..main event 20..not...1st match...20 min...2nd match 20 min..3rd match same shit etc..)


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> 1. Yes, ...


1. You mean all of the countless tournaments systems outside of the WWE, tournaments that actually have world wide prestege? You mean like all those things in New Japan does year round leading up to Wrestle Kingdom? You mean things like the huge G1 Climax? They literally tweaked that system every time they had the tournament in order to improve it. But never once did they say "well gorsh. this is getting in the way of us booking things like easily. let's stop this incredibly over event, hurr durr." At this point at least you don't know what the heck you're talking about. 

2. "No it's not" isn't an argument. I wrote way more than the "that's moot" in that post.

3. There's a lot of ways to rank a wrestling show. Advocacy for the concept is not advocacy for a specific style of system. I don't think you're stupid enough not to know this. 

4. The point is meaningless. I've already said that AEW needs work, so pointing to the fact that it has yet to beat the biggest wrestling company in the world in less than a fiscal quarter will just have to be a silly argument you use for another occasion. As for rankings, I'm still convinced that using them will put on a better show than anything WWE can come up with. That is the first fight. As for evidence, see my 1st point. Not only has it been done, but it's been happening for decades to much success.

Here we go again. You spent the entirety of the JR's argument trying to redefine JR's primary function, one that everybody, I'm sure including you until before our argument for some reason, understands, to justify his bad commentary choices. Choices that JR is actually making less of these past shows (Jeez. If he was so right why isn't he leaning into them. Gosh I wonder!) There's a word called projection. Know it well. Drink it. Live with it. It's definition will tell you a lot about this post you made. But let me give you the cliffs notes. All of this is meaningless rhetoric. Nothing in your post addresses any point I make. And is just a long-winded ad hominem attack. 

I've done all I can to defend my points and all you can say to me is "You're wrong because you think I'm wrong." Listen, the moment your argument becomes "I'm right and you wrong, and you cannot see how wrong you are even though I've explained it to you," is the moment I should close this tab and walk the heck away. 

And for the love of God. I never said they need rankings. I said rankings can be leveraged to improve a show and shouldn't be abandoned just because armchair bookers think they need to. 

------------

1. WWE has booked itself into a corner countless times. The difference is they subscribe to the creative philosophy you advocate for. Your main issue isn't rankings. Your issue is that rankings make it harder to write poorly and actually forces bookers to do their job. WWE doesn't rank yet we still have dumb stories that go nowhere, injuries, character with ZERO heat getting pushed, characters with a huge amount of heat not getting pushed, streaks that miss the mark, 50/50 booking, long term projects that never pan out, and worse of all, hard working people who spend years getting over in NXT just to be buried by WWE's crappy system, and, yes, storytelling style. 

On the other side of the world every year, Gedo and his team take it on themselves to book the G1 climax, all their events, and a whole host of tournaments and umpteen title runs and long, long term stories. They do all this work and they do it better than McMahon and with less money. 

So please, spare me. 

2. Firstly, I'm not trying to derail your point. I'm just trying to understand how this is a problem unique to a record keeping company. If you remember WCW, you know that Goldberg's streak had the same issues you're talking about. Goldberg ran up the card to the point he had to challenge. I mention Goldberg because that's the size of the streak you'll need for a ranking system to be effected the way you're describing. 

The last thing I have to say is that your point here was a non-starter since I advocate and AEW use a system that wipes the ranking every year and weighted bouts. And then there are little things called exhibition matches. If you want to run a small streak without effecting the record at all, just feed the guy unranked competitors. They basically already do this. 

3. I hate to beat this point, but its not about record and rankings being more interesting than fighting. It's about fighting being more interesting when it isn't about spilled coffee or some bullcrap like that as oppose to an actual competitive motivation. This isn't controversial stuff here. And it's harder? Good. Booking should be harder than the crap they're doing now at the bigger companies.

4. What difference does it make if you don't care or not? Strowman is a clear example of a character's mystique being shed by everything your claim Penta is subject to, without a friken ranking system or loses for that matter. Sounds like you're using bad booking and planning as an argument against ranking when the same type of mistakes can be and are made elsewhere. 

What I read here is an example of your failure to make a connection. So let me help you. I keep bringing up motivations because I don't think wrestling provides good motivations for wrestlers. At least not in the west. A good motivation for me, the best a wrestler can have is to rank. I'm not saying it's necessary. I'm just saying its the motivation that makes the best sense and should be universal for everybody. All others motivations should be secondary. Would it help if instead of motivation, I use the word goal? 

And that's the type of logic I'm talking about. Not mere logical storytelling. I'm talking about a logical goal to justification for a wrestler going into a ring, with rules, to wrestle another guy in a fake competition. Being mad might be a logical reason to beat someone's butt, but it isn't always a logical reason to do it in a wrestling ring.

5. Firstly, I never said the bookers couldn't emphasize what they wanted. So I don't know why you act as if that's some great point to make. I literally say that bookers can go about things, even a ranking system, however they want. I said they can even make a fake governing body to shake things up. Secondly, you wouldn't be hiding the main statistic. You'd just be hiding their overall record. You know, just like you don't see a football teams historical overall record. The reason for that, and I don't think you get it yet, is as I said, the record is for the character and should lead to some sort of event. If there's a new season for a new title run, why the heck is the overall record important apart from some character development? Does how many wins you made in 1992 going to count for your current Superbowl run?

6. I'm saying it's a nonissue. Who cares if guys getting pushed are getting compared? More the reason to see them compete directly. And when they finally lose, the only distinction between their success will be written in character, as it should be. The audience won't care as long as the outcome leads to a good angle. And the best angle is for those streaks to have meant something to the guy. That's why I mention Undertaker. People barely remember how great his streak was. They remember how he lost. And no one remembers what came after that. Next.

7. You're just bored with reading, period. The fact that something on paper sounding boring to you serves as a good enough point should embarrass you. 

You know what else would be a boring read? How to fly a friken plane.

And I already explained toy you what's wrong with it. The wrestlers already have a reason to fight. Booking a match around ice cream cake and best friends is more complicated than saying guy A wants to fight guy B because that's the only way to Challenge the champ. The latter writes itself. The former has to be pulled from the ether, or in Vince's case, his butt.

8. You simplified my post in an attempt to win an argument. What I was actually saying was that a streak is a streak and only the character will benefit from the differences in the ranking after the fact. . .which I said 1000 times is the dang point of records in the first place. Remember how I keep talking about how records serve to provide goals and motivations for character? Well a guy having a streak seen as less impressive than another guy is a story point that writes itself. It's conflict, and therefore good. So what?

9. Again with the streaks. You keep making the same point in different ways. I'm guessing to pad out the list. Your basic point is a record will effect booking. Here's a secret. Logging a streak doesn't alter the effects of the streak. John Cena used to have streaks. Mark Henry. Every friken wrestler of note has a streak at some point. Do you think putting a number behind it would alter what people already know? In most cases winning a bunch of matches just has you mean mugging the camera, doing nothing. Your issue isn't a number. Your issue is the concept of victories having consistent story consequences, which a ranking holds you to.

Anyway, my point about Taker is that no one had an issue with the way his streak was booked until he took the L. They could have easily had him retired from wrestlemania wether he won or lost, but his L was more about getting Lesner over than his legacy. So once again I will have to say that the point of the number is for the character's benefit and for there to be some continuity in the wins/losses to be used in the story some way (including their matches). Considering that your issue has more to do with rankings than numbers, what difference does it make how poorly Undertaker was booked? Not only was he not ranked for anything, his streak was something they could have easily booked a better conclusion for. 

10.This is nonsense. The problem with this stance you make is the assumption that a guy can't get/stay over in a loss. I say not only is this wrong, but we see evidence how wrong that is in Dynamite, NWA, New Japan, and every company that understands one thing. Losing strong can sometimes get you over more than winning can. Ask Cena. Winning didn't get him over.

Darby Allin does nothing but lose, but each fight he gets into makes him more liked. That's because of his style and psychology. This is good because the point of the number isn't about crowd reaction. It's about Darby hunting for a way to improve his rank, and not looking for a banana peel to slip on.

The idea that a number will somehow undercut this process is unfounded, untested, and frankly, flies in the face of what we've already seen in this company, at the G1 Climax, any place that winning and losing has a part in the story, even Friken Rocky I.

11. I'm not saying you're arguing against good storytelling. I'm saying you're arguing for the laziest way to tell it. I said nothing about you not being into feud, promos, or whatever, so you're just speaking out of you butt now.Allow me to skip to the relevant stuff. 

I've given you real life examples of evidence that you're wrong. Real sports, the G1 Climax (it has a point system and people love the thing), but now I must take issue with this idea that "Person A is mad at Person B and therefore they fight" notion is straight forward or effective.

First that's not the story example(if it was it would really suck). That's a template. Usually there's some bullcrap involved, a script that's rewritten at the last minute, an angle that won't get over and has to be rebooked, and more than likely a series of matches no one gives a damn about. A rank is just a damn rank. It's simple. The wrestler can cut promos around it. The fans can understand it, and anything they don't understand can be explained by THE ANNOUNCER. That is part of their job isn't it? You don't have to rent a car, you don't have to bake a cake, you don't have to brew coffee, you don't have to film a backstage segment, you don't have to rent a dump truck, you don't have to have some contrived crap, you don't have to throw a Bar-Mitzfa, you don't have to take a film crew to a bridge and have a guy chuck a belt into the East River, you don't need to work with an animal wrangler. You don't have to forget people sitting in your roster waiting to work, people you gotta pay anyway, people who could be on TV is the chicken sketch doesn't go overlong. . .

Let's see what's better: making a product that is intuitive at the risk of a little more work for the bookers to make consistent, or some messy creative that can literally book an angle with a flower pot in 30 minutes before the show starts? Why do I ask? Well, this is the type of booking you get when you don't hold bookers accountable. This is the type of story you get when you have too little restrictions. This is what you advocate for when you say there shouldn't be any long term competitive structure in the show.

None of that crap is easy. It's hard. It's hard on the dang audience. It's hard on writers who have their ideas thrown out last minute, it's hard on wrestlers who have to sell this crap. And lets say your company is sane. Booking a logical show is STILL hard. Number or no number, good booking requires the same elbow grease, same consistency to wins-losses, and the same long term commitment as a rank system. Only difference is you have to invent the wheel every month.

Confusing? How's this for confusing? Why is a champion not upset he lost the belt in 3 seconds? Why is an old lady giving birth to a hand? What the heck do these people do when they have no match? None of this stuff stops being confusing. But you know what doesn't have to be confusing? A competitive ranking system that is well thought out by a team, one you can explain with a video package if you have to.Wrestlers who are angry at another wrestler for taking his opportunity by one slot. A vet on his last season going for the belt one last time. A rookie given a title shot by the smug champ after shirking his 1# contenders.

Your way is vague and can be way more complicated than mine if the booker sees to it. Example. How is the Lana storyline NOT going to end with everyone acting like it never happened? And remember that high power crap?

At the end of the day, I trust there are smart people who can make an elegant system. That's all I gotta say about that.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Saintpat said:


> Your post only underscores how ridiculous his booking in AEW has been.
> 
> But if he’s win one/lose one in AEW, basically every other person he faces (including CIMA) gets a huge, quality win. At some point his booking has to match what he WAS for him to be considered to be a top tier guy in AEW.
> 
> I mean, you can be a great Japanese baseball player and win every award and honor there and if you come to the Major Leagues and bat .200 you’re not a great major leaguer.


I'll ask you this.

How should have Nak been booked? Not only did he come off of NXT a winner, he was a winner in New Japan. He's been booked like a loser. You honestly think a number would make that worse?

Kenny is no where near as bad off as that.

This is an argument about continuity and the initial rank, not about records. A guy as prestigious as Omega is hard to book for in a brand new show. Period. You have to make a choice and that usually means winning or losing. The thing they did right is have him lose mostly to guys who will occupy the top of the card one day if not already.


----------



## Saintpat (Dec 18, 2013)

DOTL said:


> I'll ask you this.
> 
> How should have Nak been booked? Not only did he come off of NXT a winner, he was a winner in New Japan. He's been booked like a loser. You honestly think a number would make that worse?
> 
> ...


I disagree.

Kenny is entering a new promotion that needs to establish its top stars. WWE had those. And however Nakamura has been booked has nothing to do with what AEW is doing with Kenny (or anyone else).

You have Mox and Jericho and, to a lesser degree, Cody. Those three have name/face recognition from being on TV with WWE for years. Everyone else in AEW for the most part (Dustin isn’t going to be a star, nor is Spears, PAC is awesome but didn’t carry over as a main-roster star) needs/needed to be established.

So they established Kenny both as ‘he’s one of the best in the world’ (on commentary) AND ‘he’s a glorified JTTS’ as for what he’s done in-ring. I mean he was literally the hottest free agent on the world market. The hardcore fans knew who he was and there was buzz about him that they didn’t capitalize on by making it clear to every new viewer that this guy is something special. And they dropped the ball on that.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Saintpat said:


> I disagree.
> 
> Kenny is entering a new promotion that needs to establish its top stars. WWE had those. And however Nakamura has been booked has nothing to do with what AEW is doing with Kenny (or anyone else).
> 
> ...


I concede that Omega could have been more protected. What I can't concede is that he should have won big matches or that his star is somehow damaged by this.

The reason I bring up Nak is just an example of how someone of a similar pedigree can be chewed up and spit out by a system. That hasn't happened to Omega. On-screen, he still feels like a big deal and that's mostly due to how he's sold and what people already know about him and the way people lose on the show. For a new league that has to count for something. 

And the point about people getting a star in their crown because they got a win on him is a nonstarter. Only upper carders in the AEW world have ever done that. They need those stars otherwise Kenny would be killing everyone in the high card.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Saintpat said:


> I disagree.
> 
> Kenny is entering a new promotion that needs to establish its top stars. WWE had those. And however Nakamura has been booked has nothing to do with what AEW is doing with Kenny (or anyone else).
> 
> ...


I remember someone telling me they weren’t hurting Kenny’s appeal by having him job to everyone.


----------



## RiverFenix (Dec 10, 2011)

Job to everyone? Jericho who is an all time great, to Moxley in a death match and to PAC who is one of the best in-ring in the world and was used to elevate PAC (and probably to get him to sign). Who else did Omega job to in singles? Am I missing an egregious loss?

I think he's hurt more by his competitive wins against lesser talent/low card guys. But it's what you get when the wrestlers are booking themselves against their friends - they want to make their friends look good and certainly not squash them. Kenny definitely shouldn't have been working those DARK matches - just watered him down. 

This is another reason for house shows - give guys who want to work more than once a week the opportunity to. Having Kenny wrestle at a house show for 20 minutes - nobody cares in the grand scheme, he gets his ring time in, and it keeps him off wrestling on DARK.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Job to everyone? Jericho who is an all time great, to Moxley in a death match and to PAC who is one of the best in-ring in the world and was used to elevate PAC (and probably to get him to sign). Who else did Omega job to in singles? Am I missing an egregious loss?
> 
> I think he's hurt more by his competitive wins against lesser talent/low card guys. But it's what you get when the wrestlers are booking themselves against their friends - they want to make their friends look good and certainly not squash them. Kenny definitely shouldn't have been working those DARK matches - just watered him down.
> 
> This is another reason for house shows - give guys who want to work more than once a week the opportunity to. Having Kenny wrestle at a house show for 20 minutes - nobody cares in the grand scheme, he gets his ring time in, and it keeps him off wrestling on DARK.


Those who were only seeing him for the first time in weekly television aren’t likely to watch Dark. They’re not likely to have watched the PPVs. None of it.

So, all they saw was recaps that he’d lost to Jericho. No lapsed or casual fan has a clue who the fuck PAC is. Omega is in random 6-man tag matches. And he keeps taking an ass-kicking from Moxley. Then they see his record is decent, and they immediately know, “Ohhh. They gave him wins against the real jobbers, but he isn’t important enough to get any meaningful win.” _click_ And you just lost that fan forever.

To the casual fan you’re trying to draw into this show, he is effectively a nobody that showed up wearing some dumb fucking knockoff Jack Skellington mask on the Halloween edition of Dynamite.

Then you allow him to do a vignette that shows him benching 55 pounds and talking tough about a rematch with PAC.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

I mean, there is a reason why everyone on this forum alone fails to mention Omega time and time again when discussing things they’re looking forward to see. There is a reason only Jericho and Moxley are gaining viewers.

You killed the aura of the hottest free agent in the business in less than 3 months of weekly television, but hey, he lost to PAC who remained undefeated for months and you still wouldn’t give a title shot to him.

Awesome booking!


----------



## Oda Nobunaga (Jun 12, 2006)

When you turn a guy like Omega into just another wrestler on the roster working the main events on a show that's the equivalent to your company's version of WCW Saturday Night during the Nitro era or WWF Heat, you've done something wrong there.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Oda Nobunaga said:


> When you turn a guy like Omega into just another wrestler on the roster working the main events on a show that's the equivalent to your company's version of WCW Saturday Night during the Nitro era or WWF Heat, you've done something wrong there.


A certain type of fan refuses to understand or, more likely, refuses to admit.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

bdon said:


> A certain type of fan refuses to understand or, more likely, refuses to admit.


I'll admit that he's not coming off as strong as he should be, but I'd argue that even if he won every match he'd still not communicate the height of his prowess to a casual audience.

Think about it.

In order for him to do that he has to win more than a few televised matches. He's have to recreate his success in Japan. At the moment there is no institution in AEW even close to the prestige of those events. My guess is that, knowing this, the guys in AEW want to build up to that. For that to be the case Omega would have to essentially start from scratch and AEW would have to make big events.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> 1. You mean all of the countless tournaments systems outside of the WWE, tournaments that actually have world wide prestege? You mean like all those things in New Japan does year round leading up to Wrestle Kingdom? You mean things like the huge G1 Climax? They literally tweaked that system every time they had the tournament in order to improve it. But never once did they say "well gorsh. this is getting in the way of us booking things like easily. let's stop this incredibly over event, hurr durr." At this point at least you don't know what the heck you're talking about.
> 
> 2. "No it's not" isn't an argument. I wrote way more than the "that's moot" in that post.
> 
> ...


You are so full of shit. You can be defeated in your first point. First of all, the relative and cultural success of a G1, for example, can be argued. New Japan does better business every year, but let’s not pretend this is the biggest they’ve ever been. They’re still super-niche. But even taking them as a success, THAT IS NOT WHAT WE’RE FUCKING TALKING ABOUT!!!! THAT IS A TOURNAMENT, NOT A FUCKING YEAR-ROUND WIN/LOSS RANKING SYSTEM!!!!! Holy fuck, you cannot stay on-point for even your first point.

No one is arguing against logic in wrestling. No one is arguing against certain sports-inspired influences. No one. Stop acting like that is what you are saying. You are asking for a system that is going to emphasize every creative decision you have ever made. That is fucking stupid.

“That’s all I’ve got to say about that.” Smug much? Especially for someone who loses their narrative _in their first fucking point_.

To make it richer, you are already seeing the havoc the AEW records are causing. People are confused as to why people are getting title shots and are whinging about people who should be winning, losing, etc. It’s happening and you’re still shrugging and trying to argue as if it inherently makes fights more interesting, which is absolute bullshit. A reason to fight, sure. A win-loss record is fucking implied though. It’s not even a fucking reason.

Seriously, for as much effort as you make to put words in a coherent order, you need to get some coherent thought patterns.

Imagine if Cedric Alexander had a win-loss record. That would make him and Raw interesting. Gosh darn, I wonder why no one is as smart as me? Fuck’s sake.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> You are so full of shit. You can be defeated in your first point. First of all, the relative and cultural success of a G1, for example, can be argued. New Japan does better business every year, but let’s not pretend this is the biggest they’ve ever been. They’re still super-niche. But even taking them as a success, THAT IS NOT WHAT WE’RE FUCKING TALKING ABOUT!!!! THAT IS A TOURNAMENT, NOT A FUCKING YEAR-ROUND WIN/LOSS RANKING SYSTEM!!!!! Holy fuck, you cannot stay on-point for even your first point.
> 
> No one is arguing against logic in wrestling. No one is arguing against certain sports-inspired influences. No one. Stop acting like that is what you are saying. You are asking for a system that is going to emphasize every creative decision you have ever made. That is fucking stupid.
> 
> ...


It's not a single elimination tournament. It's on a round robin format. That's fundamentally the same thing as a ranked system stretched over a season of competition. Use your head. It's a long form, points based tourney that would provide months of television if every match was aired. I suggested the possibility of a system that uses records to determine the participant of a final which will determine the number one contender who participates in the next PPV.. THAT'S THE SAME DAMN THING AS THE G1 CLIMAX. The thing here is this isn't the system AEW uses, but that's no issue considering I say time and time again that their system needs to be built into something like this.

The G1 climax even has blocks, which sound exactly like my earlier allusions to divisions and the NFL's conference system. It all fits.

But the point which I brought G1 up for isn't whether or not AEW's current system works. It's whether or not it's possible to make a ranking system that does. G1 isn't just an example it is possible. It's also an example that it could be wildly successful. And don't give me this crap about about NJ being niche. The only way NJ is niche is if being Japanese occupies a niche. NJ is a big deal in Japan, it just isn't an international force yet, but that's where they're headed if they keep it up.

People are confused about AEW's system because it's incomplete. There's literally nothing to tell us how ranks determine championship matches. I say this before. Why do I need to again?

Talk about incoherent. You're being purposefully obtuse in your last sentence. I never said that simply having a record means things are interesting. I said that having a record or some kind of competitive format can lead to interesting character and story moments that are more intuitive and potentially satisfying than the current stuff we're subjected to. I say this a billion times over short story's amount of words and you still can't, or won't comprehend it. The irony of the last sentence is astounding.


----------



## reyfan (May 23, 2011)

Oda Nobunaga said:


> When you turn a guy like Omega into just another wrestler on the roster working the main events on a show that's the equivalent to your company's version of WCW Saturday Night during the Nitro era or WWF Heat, you've done something wrong there.


I'll admit that I didn't see Omega's work before AEW so my opinion is only based on his career in AEW, but they have portrayed him at the level of Dolph Ziggler, he is there to work with people they want to get over, but will never be a big star himself, that's how he appears on TV.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> It's not a single elimination tournament. It's on a round robin format. That's fundamentally the same thing as a ranked system stretched over a season of competition. Use your head. It's a long form, points based tourney that would provide months of television if every match was aired. I suggested the possibility of a system that uses records to determine the participant of a final which will determine the number one contender who participates in the next PPV.. THAT'S THE SAME DAMN THING AS THE G1 CLIMAX. The thing here is this isn't the system AEW uses, but that's no issue considering I say time and time again that their system needs to be built into something like this.
> 
> The G1 climax even has blocks, which sound exactly like my earlier allusions to divisions and the NFL's conference system. It all fits.
> 
> ...


A round robin tournament is still a fucking tournament. You will say just about anything, won't you. I'm not suggesting no round robin tournaments either. Neither were you, so cut out that noise. Stop trying to change the goalposts. The G1 _emphasizes_ the story of those matches. That's exactly my point. If the whole year was a G1, the G1 wouldn't mean shit. You've completely misunderstood what it is that makes the G1 work, by the way. Your emphasis is on the points. I think most sane people would agree that it is on the drama and the stakes that those points merely represent in that specific context. 

No one cares if Darby Allin is 13-4. If Darby Allin needs to win a match in order to stay alive for a title shot at the biggest show of the year, and this happens in a barrage of great matches? That matters more. It's not his fucking points. 

Oh yes, the NFL has blocks and the G1 has blocks, so if you put blocks into AEW it would automatically be successful. White noise. White, self-congratulatory noise. The G1 works because Gedo is booking some of the top wrestlers in the world to go out and beat the shit out of each other, and their personal histories and professional aspirations collide in a flurry. It ain't because of blocks. Fuck. Take away the blocks and you can still have a fantastic round robin.

By the way, you know what else was a round robin tournament? The Bound For Glory Series. Yeah. These systems aren't inherently good. You need the good shit to fit in there, and the system should only be used sparingly _as a gimmick_. 

And that is not your position. I am going to call you out directly as a liar now. You have explicitly stated that two people having a fight is boring, but two people having a fight with a record means that something is at stake. You are wrong and now you are back-pedalling to make your position sound more flexible. No one has argued against stories. They've argued against your idea of what makes a story interesting, and now you're changing what that story is. You don't ever take responsibility for the things you actually say, just like when you denied generalizing when you were shown quotes highlighting how you generalized. Either English is not your first language, or you are just a liar.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

DOTL said:


> 1. You mean all of the countless tournaments systems outside of the WWE, tournaments that actually have world wide prestege? You mean like all those things in New Japan does year round leading up to Wrestle Kingdom? You mean things like the huge G1 Climax? They literally tweaked that system every time they had the tournament in order to improve it. But never once did they say "well gorsh. this is getting in the way of us booking things like easily. let's stop this incredibly over event, hurr durr." At this point at least you don't know what the heck you're talking about.
> 
> 2. "No it's not" isn't an argument. I wrote way more than the "that's moot" in that post.
> 
> ...


Not going to lie I just "liked" your post because of how long it was but I only agree about halfway with the stuff you said. Thank you for your passion with the post and I'm not being sarcastic.

EDIT: Just realized you and @The Wood have been going at it for quite a while. I love it!


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

Holly shit who just wrote a book in here? Whats it called?, how to run a wrestling company. Lol thats crazy amount of passion to get a point over. I aint reading that but i hope its good ! Lol

I think they will try many this all of 2020 until they get a working method. I cant say the same for wwe trying but they dont have a choice so.

It will be a fun year of love hate and everything in between


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> A round robin tournament is still a fucking tournament. You will say just about anything, won't you. I'm not suggesting no round robin tournaments either. Neither were you, so cut out that noise. Stop trying to change the goalposts. The G1 _emphasizes_ the story of those matches. That's exactly my point. If the whole year was a G1, the G1 wouldn't mean shit. You've completely misunderstood what it is that makes the G1 work, by the way. Your emphasis is on the points. I think most sane people would agree that it is on the drama and the stakes that those points merely represent in that specific context.


LOL. You're trying to salvage your point. I'll give you that. My entire argument on points/win-loss record has been about DRAMA the entire time. I've said "provides motivation and goals" so much in our "debate" that you've even commented on that as if you didn't understand what it means. YOU'RE the one who wants to emphasize "all about the numbers," not for a system, but as a strawman position because it's a heck of a lot easier for your ego to disagree with me than agree about the G1 point.

Of course the G1 is a tournament I use the word to describe it as such. But I'm talking about the similarity of the format to the system I think would work in AEW over the course of it's programming. The only real difference would be it being presented over a season of shows, whatever length that may be.

Let's do some math. The G1 has 10C2 + 10C2 matches not including finals. That's 90. That's each competitor facing all the others once. 2 groups of ten. There are a little less than 52 shows of AEW a year. Tournament or not, The G1 is large enough to almost fill two years worth of tv content, if they only aired one match an episode. Half that for two. I suggested quarterly seasons, which will make things even less complicated than the G1 because they'd probably have a smaller pool.

And as a parting gift, here is a quote of me talking about motivation.



> > Storytelling 101. Every character has to be proactive. They have to WANT something. And waiting for Bubba to spit in your eye so you can care about the championship isn't wanting anything. It's passive writing and its bad in every storytelling circle, especially wrestling. If people have trouble understanding that a guy wants to qualify for a championship AND kick the butt ofa guy he hates, then I feel bad for them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't try to jedi your way into a point. You suck at it. You might not remember(or read for that matter) what I typed. But I do. Above, I explicitly say that the system will be there to creative motivation and (without using the word) enhance drama. Your point is fabricated to make it sound like you're not agreeing with the entire premise of my argument when you totally are.

This is you:



> You've completely misunderstood what it is that makes the G1 work, by the way. Your emphasis is on the points. I think most sane people would agree that it is on the drama and the stakes that those points merely represent in that specific context.


This is me



DOTL said:


> *What you see as a limit on creativity, I see as holding bookers to more long term planning, accountability for their angles, and giving wrestlers something do when they aren't mad because someone stepped on their new boots. You can still book your angles, have your characters, have your heat, your rivalries, and if you want, idiots in beer trucks, but it will all be done in a kayfabe competitive context. Otherwise, what's the friken point of them being there? To feud? Feuds are angles and were never meant to take over for the appearance of an actual event.*


Now if I know you, you'll try to contextualize this post to mean something I didn't say in order to avoid sounding as if you're conceding in the above point.



> No one cares if Darby Allin is 13-4. If Darby Allin needs to win a match in order to stay alive for a title shot at the biggest show of the year, and this happens in a barrage of great matches? That matters more. It's not his fucking points.


You're again trying to re-frame my argument so you can win what you've lost. I said it time and time again, and I'll say it once that it's not about the numbers, it's about the goals and motivations those numbers provide. If those numbers remained abstract so, as you tried to advocate earlier, the bookers can make changes and not be held to any adherence to the competitive nature of the story, undermining the point of the thing in the first place. The drama rings false. And to remind you to stay on target so you can't try to weasel yourself around an the argument gain, here's what I say much earlier in this so-called debate.



> > Storytelling 101. Every character has to be proactive. They have to WANT something. And waiting for Bubba to spit in your eye so you can care about the championship isn't wanting anything. It's passive writing and its bad in every storytelling circle, especially wrestling. If people have trouble understanding that a guy wants to qualify for a championship AND kick the butt ofa guy he hates, then I feel bad for them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Oh yes, the NFL has blocks and the G1 has blocks, so if you put blocks into AEW it would automatically be successful. White noise. White, self-congratulatory noise. The G1 works because Gedo is booking some of the top wrestlers in the world to go out and beat the shit out of each other, and their personal histories and professional aspirations collide in a flurry. It ain't because of blocks. Fuck. Take away the blocks and you can still have a fantastic round robin.


You're laboring so hard to make a point here it's humorous. Please.don't hurt yourself.
I never said blocks are an automatic success. That's not remotely my point and you know it. I said that it can WORK, and to clarify, I mean it can work to make booking this easier. That's because it has worked for more than 20 years for the same reason. And why are you stopping at Gedo eliminating blocks? According to you, he could get rid of the round-robin format and provide something just as good as the G1 Climax by formatting every competition as a simple "you're mad at him...fight." The format is designed to add drama.



> By the way, you know what else was a round robin tournament? The Bound For Glory Series. Yeah. These systems aren't inherently good. You need the good shit to fit in there, and the system should only be used sparingly _as a gimmick_.


And? I said the G1 was an example that a system can work. I've proven with math that the G1 is already bigger and more complex than anything AEW would have to do (remember the G1 has 10C2 + 10C2 matches which equals 90 not including finals) I never said failure was impossible. Good grief man, this is getting sad.



> And that is not your position. I am going to call you out directly as a liar now. You have explicitly stated that two people having a fight is boring, but two people having a fight with a record means that something is at stake. You are wrong and now you are back-pedalling to make your position sound more flexible. No one has argued against stories. They've argued against your idea of what makes a story interesting, and now you're changing what that story is. You don't ever take responsibility for the things you actually say, just like when you denied generalizing when you were shown quotes highlighting how you generalized. Either English is not your first language, or you are just a liar.


Remember that thing I kept quoting? Well here it is again.



> > Storytelling 101. Every character has to be proactive. They have to WANT something. And waiting for Bubba to spit in your eye so you can care about the championship isn't wanting anything. It's passive writing and its bad in every storytelling circle, especially wrestling. If people have trouble understanding that a guy wants to qualify for a championship AND kick the butt ofa guy he hates, then I feel bad for them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The liar is you. Using numbers as the foundation of drama has been my point since day one. You can go back and read the post this came from, you lazy charlatan.

The G1 point has cost you your argument and now you pathetically try to rewrite history. SMH.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

By the way I have more quotes. This time, from you.



The Wood said:


> 10. It detracts from the actual reasons people are fighting. Stories are best when succinct and focused. Clear motivations. A win-loss record, for shit that matters, is going to create a layer of tension that can potentially distract from the match. Whether it's someone loss record when the fans are supposed to be buying them as a bad-ass, or whether it's just splitting focus. If you don't need it in a story, it shouldn't be in a story. Redundancy is one of the biggest sins of writing. You can have winners, losers, contenders and champions without a redundant ranking system.


This is you essentially arguing that making a story around a competitive ranking structure will provide redundant drama(tension).

Now why would you arguing this if my point was never about providing drama? Hmm. Sounds like you're attempting to move MY goalpost closer to you for an easier shot.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> By the way I have more quotes. This time, from you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I stopped reading when I got to you talking about feuds as if they aren’t enough and you need some sort of system around that. That is exactly what I am criticizing and exactly what you’re saying you’re not saying. I trust most people here have the brains to see that about you. BigCy didn’t agree with your self-professed excellent points, but he’s more clever than most here.

Having a win-loss record in wrestling is stupid. Spin that any way you want, it’s a bad idea. I’ve explained very thoroughly why. It makes your job harder and more often than not books you into a variety of different corners. A booker should never do that to themselves. If you don’t get that, you don’t get anything.

The rest of your post is blah, blah, blah — exhausting nonsense. Stick to the core argument: fighting itself is a story, a personal issue is more crucial than a exhibition and win-loss records in wrestling don’t work.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> I stopped reading when I got to you talking about feuds as if they aren’t enough and you need some sort of system around that. That is exactly what I am criticizing and exactly what you’re saying you’re not saying. I trust most people here have the brains to see that about you. BigCy didn’t agree with your self-professed excellent points, but he’s more clever than most here.


I said feuds aren't enough to justify the event. Feuding for feuding's sake is empty and oftentimes need to be heated up over the dumbest, most non-intuitive things. A competitive structure provides a basic character motivation for all wrestlers, and can serve as a basis for any story you want to put on top of that. Including feuds. This way you don't have to drum up feuds to justify the matches or what the characters wrestle for in the first place.

I'm denying that I said it's all about numbers inherently making things interesting, and I have quotes proving that it isn't just about the numbers, but the dramatic function they serve.

This is simple stuff that you're trying to make harder just to win an argument. You even tried to alter my points until I posted old quotes for your ass proving you're full of crap.

And who cares if BigCity disagrees with me? Rankings are a controversial idea. I can live with that. I was having a wonderful conversation with many users not crazy about the idea before you made this about your need to feel right about everything.



> Having a win-loss record in wrestling is stupid. Spin that any way you want, it’s a bad idea. I’ve explained very thoroughly why. It makes your job harder and more often than not books you into a variety of different corners. A booker should never do that to themselves. If you don’t get that, you don’t get anything.
> 
> The rest of your post is blah, blah, blah — exhausting nonsense. Stick to the core argument: fighting itself is a story, a personal issue is more crucial than a exhibition and win-loss records in wrestling don’t work.


I've proven that what you say is not only wrong, it's been wrong for over 20 years. Let me provide the cliffsnotes it for your lazy ass.

*[Any system will be too complex to book] *The G1 Climax has over 90 matches, thus a larger and more complex event than what would be required for AEW. Yet they do it, every year over the course of a single month. It's not only possible, someone is already booking a harder concept. Not only that but NJ has other tournaments that fill the rest of the year,many of them round robins that have to be booked in the same way. I say much earlier that it being difficult (and it would be) is no reason not to try.

*[The G1 is a bad example because it's a tournament]* 90 matches is enough content to put on.a single televised match for a little less year. It being a tournament (a round robin tournament) doesn't change the fact that it is competitive structure with almost a whole years worth of matches even if you air 2 a week. Add some promos, tag and women's and you have Dynamite booked.

*[No one would enjoy such a system]*The G1 is a special event that everyone really likes. 

*[No one has ever done it right before, so that means it can't work]* Someone has done it right. You know who, so I don't have to repeat myself. Also, I'd like to note that it evolved into its current format. It fluctuated between simpler and more complex versions throughout its existence.

*[Story would suffer and be confusing under such a system]*The G1, which people seem to understand well enough, doesn't preclude storylines, but actually enhances them. And to remind you that you basically concede this point without realizing I will quote you.



> You've completely misunderstood what it is that makes the G1 work, by the way. Your emphasis is on the points. I think most sane people would agree that it is on the *drama and the stakes that* *those points merely represent in that specific context*.


Note the bold and how it essentially agrees with this point I make earlier



> *What you see as a limit on creativity, I see as holding bookers to more long term planning, accountability for their angles, and giving wrestlers something do when they aren't mad because someone stepped on their new boots. You can still book your angles, have your characters, have your heat, your rivalries, and if you want, idiots in beer trucks, but it will all be done in a kayfabe competitive context. Otherwise, what's the friken point of them being there? To feud? Feuds are angles and were never meant to take over for the appearance of an actual event.*


The basic premise of your argument was always building a show around a ranking system would take away from the product and is highly impractical to the point of almost unavoidable failure. I have proven with a real life example that this isn't always true.

The next point you make is that you don't need it to tell a story. I never said you did. I do say that a "sport-centric product" would need rankings in order to truly be "sport-centric," but as a generally requirement for storytelling. No. I simply say that a system that works would provide a better basis than any other story you'd try to tell with just a vague notion of "logical booking" and druming up feuds just to justify a match, and could potentially create something special. Here is a real early point I make to @RapShepard saying this exact thing.



DOTL said:


> 1. I agree that you don't need them to do logical match ups. But where I disagree is that logical booking supersedes any system structure at all. Logical booking has its limits, and much of the stress in booking is, I personally believe, the result of having a flimsy kayfabe motivation for the wrestlers wrestling in the first place. It baffles me that we talk about this being a story, but all the wrestlers', from jobbers to blue-chippers, primary reason for being there is "I work for this promotion and wrestle for no reason until someone pisses me off.". . .


Note the extra bit about me talking about better character motivations. Once again, evidence that my belief revolves around the story and not ranking for rankings sake. Also note that I believe booking is stressed by the inconsistency of character motivations. I echo this point in a later post. The really long one:



> None of that crap is easy. It's hard. It's hard on the dang audience. It's hard on writers who have their ideas thrown out last minute, it's hard on wrestlers who have to sell this crap. And lets say your company is sane. Booking a logical show is STILL hard. Number or no number, good booking requires the same elbow grease, same consistency to wins-losses, and the same long term commitment as a rank system. Only difference is you have to invent the wheel every month.


To summarize. You make a universal claim. I provided a real world example suggesting that claim isn't universally true. You say a bunch of extra stuff in an attempt to change what I say. I post quotes proving your interpretation is a lie. You double down in this post, conveniently disregarding what I wrote. I post this. I cite your and my own posts to contextualize everything. Now I write this last line.

I think this is enough for now. I doubt you'll read any of this though.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> I said feuds aren't enough to justify the event. Feuding for feuding's sake is empty and oftentimes need to be heated up over the dumbest, most non-intuitive things. A competitive structure provides a basic character motivation for all wrestlers, and can serve as a basis for any story you want to put on top of that. Including feuds. This way you don't have to drum up feuds to justify the matches or what the characters wrestle for in the first place.
> 
> I'm denying that I said it's all about numbers inherently making things interesting, and I have quotes proving that it isn't just about the numbers, but the dramatic function they serve.
> 
> ...


Feuds are enough though. They’re more interesting than matches without that context for a ranking. That’s exactly the whole point. You keep denying what you’re saying. If there was a choice between an angle match and a cold match, a booker should always choose the angle match as a money-making priority.

The G1 is an exception to the rule, critically, but let’s not pretend it’s not an example to the rule, and let’s not pretend that 90 matches is enough to fill a year of wrestling. If you ran 52 shows a year and had five matches on each, that’s 260 matches. That ignores PPVs and house shows (ideally). So shove your 90 matches up your ass. That’s a tournament, not a system, and they aren’t as interesting as you think they are, especially when it comes to North American audiences.

If you’ve got drama behind a match, the ranking bullshit becomes redundant. I don’t know how you don’t get that.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Feuds are enough though. They’re more interesting than matches without that context for a ranking. That’s exactly the whole point. You keep denying what you’re saying. If there was a choice between an angle match and a cold match, a booker should always choose the angle match as a money-making priority.


My issue has always been the way feuds are developed. I always hate that some guy has to spill coffee on a dude (I think Jericho did this to Big Show or whatever) or some other non-excuse to throw down. An actual competitive structure not only is capable of providing what you're talking about, but it can potentially do so in a way that makes sense for the world these characters are in. Your feuds are fueled by the reasonable desires of a professional wrestler, a lost spot, a betrayal, a competitive rivalry. Just some guy popping out and saying "I don't like you" might work for a dream match (Sazuki versus Mox for one), but it's no way to tell a long form story for every character. There's no way you can sustain that. We see examples of that even in AEW. For every Cody vs Jericho there's more than a few Janelas vs Shawn Spears.That's what I mean by feuding for feuding's sake. 



> The G1 is an exception to the rule, critically, but let’s not pretend it’s not an example to the rule, and let’s not pretend that 90 matches is enough to fill a year of wrestling. If you ran 52 shows a year and had five matches on each, that’s 260 matches. That ignores PPVs and house shows (ideally). So shove your 90 matches up your ass. That’s a tournament, not a system, and they aren’t as interesting as you think they are, especially when it comes to North American audiences.


This is not an accurate reflection of what I've been saying. You know good and dang well that not every match on the card will be a singles Heavy Weight match. You have mid-tier, tag, women's. Two matches would fill the singles spot for 45 shows in a 20 man round-robin format. And even if these matches were all you show, I literally say that you can have quarterly seasons to fill out the calendar. So kindly shove that all up in your ass with cloves, mint, some garlic and give it a twist. 

Once again, I know it's a tournament. What difference does that make?The format is a series of structured matches held over an extended period of time and tells a competitive story filled with all the drama, action, feuds, and heat anyone could want. This is just a game of semantics at this point.



> If you’ve got drama behind a match, the ranking bullshit becomes redundant. I don’t know how you don’t get that.


Let me illustrate the issue with this point. 

"If dog's didn't bite, you wouldn't need muzzles. It would become redundant." 

You're confusing the outcome with the prescription. You don't have an actual solution to create drama. Just build feuds (whatever the heck that means). But there's one problem with that:

Feuds are a plot point not a method. When you write a story you don't start off with army A versus army B and expect people to care. You set the stage for that if the feud is indeed the point. Look at Romeo and Juliette. An ongoing feud served only as a backdrop for the story and created tension not because people were fighting, but because two members of a feuding house loved each other. That is drama. The best stories in wrestling have a beginning middle and end. If a feud is your story,the feud should blossom around the end of the first act. But before that the mechanisms must be in place to justify it. Otherwise spilled coffee or some other random BS. 

Go watch this movie. 








The Prestige (film) - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





These guys didn't just start fighting. They were professionals who had a falling out within the context of their profession. This resulted in a heated feud and rivalry. Structure just provides context, a setting, and a proper goal for each character. They're magicians who live in a world of magicians and their hatred is born out of that world. Just because wrestling is wrestling doesn't make it any different.

I've said it before and I'll say it again,* done well, *a competitive environment would serve as a the best foundation for a wrestling story, not only because it's not withheld from all the stuff wrestling is already good at, but it will install into characters a real purpose on which feuds, angles, heartache, anger, pain, milk trucks or whatever are developed. If the characters are full characters that exist outside of whatever feud is written for them, then every feud would be an organic offspring of their different MOTIVATIONS and GOALS. (There goes those words again.)

Without a convincing goal, you will not have a convincing feud. This is why WWE blows.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

@DOTL and @The Wood going for that AEW World Debate Championship.  Carry on.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> My issue has always been the way feuds are developed. I always hate that some guy has to spill coffee on a dude (I think Jericho did this to Big Show or whatever) or some other non-excuse to throw down. An actual competitive structure not only is capable of providing what you're talking about, but it can potentially do so in a way that makes sense for the world these characters are in. Your feuds are fueled by the reasonable desires of a professional wrestler, a lost spot, a betrayal, a competitive rivalry. Just some guy popping out and saying "I don't like you" might work for a dream match (Sazuki versus Mox for one), but it's no way to tell a long form story for every character. There's no way you can sustain that. We see examples of that even in AEW. For every Cody vs Jericho there's more than a few Janelas vs Shawn Spears.That's what I mean by feuding for feuding's sake.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then don’t do stupid feuds? That would seem obvious. You are arguing against the outcome instead of the prescription. Something about dogs and muzzles.

None of that also changes that win-loss records and rankings in wrestling suck, are over-complicated, book you into corners, and do not work. It’s that simple, and you can refer to the KISS method. Your system is too much work, leaves too much room for things to go wrong, and isn’t as captivating as you claim it is. I get bored reading your descriptions, and I read just about every post in here.

You can use a competitive framework (which basically is wrestling), without any of the extraneous shit you’re talking about.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Then don’t do stupid feuds? That would seem obvious. You are arguing against the outcome instead of the prescription. Something about dogs and muzzles.
> 
> None of that also changes that win-loss records and rankings in wrestling suck, are over-complicated, book you into corners, and do not work. It’s that simple, and you can refer to the KISS method. Your system is too much work, leaves too much room for things to go wrong, and isn’t as captivating as you claim it is. I get bored reading your descriptions, and I read just about every post in here.
> 
> You can use a competitive framework (which basically is wrestling), without any of the extraneous shit you’re talking about.


How entertaining I am to you is not my concern. So this is a wasted comment.

You keep saying that the solution is to not make bad content. This is what the dog analogy was for. I'm talking about* how* to not make bad content. In short, every problem in wrestling stories stems from the breakdown of kayfabe.There's literally no setting, no situational context, and thus no goal/motivation for the wrestlers leading into these feuds. They just walk around in some post-modern,"I'm working for a wrestling company. Everything is fake" sort of way, until someone is booked to piss someone off. This forces them in to mostly terrible feuds that don't move the needle because they have to be generated for reasons the format of the show didn't take time to establish.

I think I've done my job to prove that not only can it work, but doing so has created the foundation for the most exciting yearly event in wrestling. Never once I said it couldn't go wrong or would always be captivating, but there are huge examples of it going right and being highly captivating. So this is a dead point as far as I'm concerned.

What's extraneous is having to come up with excuses for fights every time you want to put on a match. This approach is the main reason we get random crap that go nowhere. Nothing is mores simple than, "this guy needs to beat this guy to get closer to winning a title shot." What the heck does a wrestler's shoot personal life have to do with anything, or dog food, or coffee, or whatever the heck bullcrap they try to sell us? None of that is more efficient or a sports framework. .How is trying to understand why the Rock is fighting a guy with a manikin head simpler than these guys are trying to win a contest? There are reality shows with more complex rules than that.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> How entertaining I am to you is not my concern. So this is a wasted comment.
> 
> You keep saying that the solution is to not make bad content. This is what the dog analogy was for. I'm talking about* how* to not make bad content. In short, every problem in wrestling stories stems from the breakdown of kayfabe.There's literally no setting, no situational context, and thus no goal/motivation for the wrestlers leading into these feuds. They just walk around in some post-modern,"I'm working for a wrestling company. Everything is fake" sort of way, until someone is booked to piss someone off. This forces them in to mostly terrible feuds that don't move the needle because they have to be generated for reasons the format of the show didn't take time to establish.
> 
> ...


A number by a name in of itself doesn't make things inherently more interesting for most people. You can say something like Jericho spilling coffee on Kane is a stupid reason for a feud, but I'd say it's more interesting than throwing folk out there because they're the 7th and 8th ranked wrestler. It's especially more interesting when you put it in context. Kane wasn't upset about the coffee, he was upset and overreacting because Jericho said "hey hope I didn't burn you". Which played into Kane's backstory of being a burn victim and showed how unhinged he could be. That's a lot more interesting for a midcard feud than just fighting for a number. 

Wrestling shouldn't rely on basic things like rankings and W/L records because wrestling can make itself more interesting than that. The reasons actual sports are always looking for a story is because a story involved is much more interesting than competition for competition sake. Now real sports can get away with it because they're real competition at the end of the day. But wrestling shouldn't concern themselves with that.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> A number by a name in of itself doesn't make things inherently more interesting for most people. You can say something like Jericho spilling coffee on Kane is a stupid reason for a feud, but I'd say it's more interesting than throwing folk out there because they're the 7th and 8th ranked wrestler. It's especially more interesting when you put it in context. Kane wasn't upset about the coffee, he was upset and overreacting because Jericho said "hey hope I didn't burn you". Which played into Kane's backstory of being a burn victim and showed how unhinged he could be. That's a lot more interesting for a midcard feud than just fighting for a number.


That is kinda funny, but it isn't grounds for a structured bout with rules. That's just grounds for a butt whooping. Think about it. If you're a supposed unhinged monster why would you go in a ring and then try to win a match against someone who has insulted you? Why wouldn't you just kill him? This is what I mean when I say poor logic. You make the pursuit for improving your rank sound clinical, but essentially every title match you've seen is the very same concept. You have a guy without a title (2#) trying to become the guy with the title (#1.) Drumming up a story about coffee and burns is not only more complicated when you consider you'd have to do that for every pair of wrestlers you have, it's not sustainable. On top of all that, it's very hit and miss.



> Wrestling shouldn't rely on basic things like rankings and W/L records because wrestling can make itself more interesting than that. The reasons actual sports are always looking for a story is because a story involved is much more interesting than competition for competition sake. Now real sports can get away with it because they're real competition at the end of the day. But wrestling shouldn't concern themselves with that.


This seems like a matter of taste. As I've told you, I've never been into the WWE/F stuff except for when I was really small. It's as simple as this. If a wrestling is going into a competition for anything other than to compete, why bother? Why not just commit assault?(It seems they get away with that in the WWE backstage well enough.) But having a guy wanting to wrestle because he wants to be the best at WRESTLING is the most basic and best story to tell. He should feud with guys who want the same thing.

I think you guys have it backwards. It's all the other stuff that are extra things that shows shouldn't rely on. 

Take Naito vs Okata. They are *competitive* rivals and produced one of the most well invested stories in the past decade. Coffee can't do that.


----------



## AEWMoxley (May 26, 2019)

AEW is making a lot of the same mistakes that pushed me away from WWE several years ago. They do some things better than WWE has done, and that WWE used to do back in the AE when the product was great, like giving characters creative freedom and control and pushing charismatic mic workers, but in many ways, they are as lifeless as WWE was before I stopped watching. They are way too focused on matches, with little to no emphasis on backstage or out of the arena segments, promos are still few and far between, most angles and storylines are not very interesting, they've got some incredibly cheesy characters that are simply not entertaining, etc.

Maybe the Moxley vs Inner Circle angle can make up for this when it starts to pick up. However, as far as all of the other performers and storylines go (other than MJF) I've got absolutely no faith.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> That is kinda funny, but it isn't grounds for a structured bout with rules. That's just grounds for a butt whooping. Think about it. If you're a supposed unhinged monster why would you go in a ring and then try to win a match against someone who has insulted you? Why wouldn't you just kill him? This is what I mean when I say poor logic. You make the pursuit for improving your rank sound clinical, but essentially every title match you've seen is the very same concept. You have a guy without a title (2#) trying to become the guy with the title (#1.) Drumming up a story about coffee and burns is not only more complicated when you consider you'd have to do that for every pair of wrestlers you have, it's not sustainable. On top of all that, it's very hit and miss.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's just part of story telling in fiction. Why wouldn't Thanks just go collect the infinity stones himself. Same reason why Batman won't kill the Joker. Kane killing Jericho backstage isn't much of a story. But him beating Jericho's ass and costing him title matches and opportunities is a story and allows him to torture Jericho for his transgressions. 

It's certainly a taste thing, but I think your taste is has a small minority that wants it. Like a heatless lower midcard match is a heatless lower card match rankings and records or not you know. Without a real story involved rankings alone mean nothing.

Even with Okada vs Naito I don't watch NJPW but I know that story is a competitive rivalry and about Naito finally reaching his destiny. And none of that needed an official always present W-L record with rankings to tell that story. You didn't need a record and ranking to understand the story of "Hey this guy Naito was supposed to be the guy, he failed at it. Okada stepped in and took that spot and flourished. Naito then becames this fuck it all kind of bitter guy. But now it's his chance to fulfill his destiny."


----------



## Bloody Warpath (Jan 6, 2020)

A good rollercoaster takes you up and brings you down then up and then down (yes this is simplified). Instead of having these ups and downs represented as curves to allow the audience to absorb what just happened and come down before something takes them back up again, there have been large portions of Dynamite that if graphed out would look like my heart rate during a stress test. It is ok to ease off of the accelerator a little. Take the audience for a ride with treating it like the bus from Speed.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Fuuuuuck..... just popped in for shits and giggles

this thread has some BOOKS written in them  ?

enjoy lads

ps> here is a little Matt Jackson quote just to spice things up while I’m gone again:

‘We want long-term, nuanced stories, and sometimes you have to struggle and suffer a little bit to get to the climax of the story... Wrestling fans are just so used to getting exactly what they need at the snap of a finger now.’


----------



## Swan-San (May 25, 2019)

win loss records aren't needed. But they're not the problem if you write storys that include them in a good way. The problem is the people booking. Basically the people writing the show don't know what they're doing, and they're using the win loss stats as their story because they can't write.


----------



## TKO Wrestling (Jun 26, 2018)

They are going wrong by not using an outside production team that eyeballs have never seen in wrestling before. If you watched WCW or TNA, you are seeing basically the same production as AEW. Now go watch something like the Victoria Secrets Fashion shows and see how different it looks. Or an awards show on TV. It is just completely different. I know TNT is providing this but it really has hurt AEW. People wanted different!!!

Kahn being so tight budgeted is the thing hurting them the most. They could be at twice the viewership right now if he would just open up the damn checkbook.


----------



## herbski (May 9, 2013)

Randy Lahey said:


> AEW should be the anti-pc, take risks, adult oriented wrestling show. They should be going after the young UFC audience, the college frat culture, and the audience that would have been watching the Attitude Era. Instead, its apparently indy geeks hiring their buddies, and doing the same garbage that has made people quit watching WWE. It's as if the current era of wrestlers hate the Attitude Era. Well, the fans of today hate what is being put out, as you see the ratings for every promotion.
> 
> So knowing their target audience is a problem. I also think ownership is an issue. Mainly because I can't see Father Khan (NFL Owner) allowing his son to do anything that might bring negative publicity to himself. So you aren't going to see AEW taking risks the way a wrestling promotion needs to in order to be popular. Getting beat in ratings by a minor league promotion like NXT is complete failure.
> 
> I mean, I'm convinced if you put an adult oriented wrestling show on something like HBO, it would do good ratings if it was written for adults. But this watered down boring garbage is never going to sell again. Ever. WWE will continue to lose viewers till they go out of business or are only on WWE Network. And AEW will do the same


I don't know - maybe I am just getting older or something - but I feel like reading social media, this board, etc - that ANTI-PC won't draw a dime these days. Seems to me that most young wrestling fans - and most younger people in general are very PC. I seem to see that people say they want "edgy" - but when they get anything resembling edgy they easily get offended it by it. Maybe I am wrong though I don't know.


----------



## Benoit's Weight Machine (Dec 28, 2019)

herbski said:


> I don't know - maybe I am just getting older or something - but I feel like reading social media, this board, etc - that ANTI-PC won't draw a dime these days. Seems to me that most young wrestling fans - and most younger people in general are very PC. I seem to see that people say they want "edgy" - but when they get anything resembling edgy they easily get offended it by it. Maybe I am wrong though I don't know.


That's what we call good old fashioned heat which is sorely lacking nowadays.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

TKO Wrestling said:


> They are going wrong by not using an outside production team that eyeballs have never seen in wrestling before. If you watched WCW or TNA, you are seeing basically the same production as AEW. Now go watch something like the Victoria Secrets Fashion shows and see how different it looks. Or an awards show on TV. It is just completely different. I know TNT is providing this but it really has hurt AEW. People wanted different!!!
> 
> Kahn being so tight budgeted is the thing hurting them the most. They could be at twice the viewership right now if he would just open up the damn checkbook.


While there are snafus, glitches and errors that may occur during any live event, you can't prevent something from happening, unless it's deliberate. Whether it's a microphone issue, a throw to, missing a particular shot, etc. these things are going to happen. And I don't understand the "looks like an indie fed" remarks. It's a wrestling show. There is really not a whole lot you can do to change things up, that hasn't been attempted before. By the way, the Victoria Secret shows are taped and edited and polished and full of glam because well... it's Victoria Secret. This may seem a bit "out there", but I'm pretty sure that absolute perfection is their goal.

I can't believe we're talking about Victoria Secret. Man, you guys try so hard to come up with new things to complain about.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> That's just part of story telling in fiction. Why wouldn't Thanks just go collect the infinity stones himself. Same reason why Batman won't kill the Joker. Kane killing Jericho backstage isn't much of a story. But him beating Jericho's ass and costing him title matches and opportunities is a story and allows him to torture Jericho for his transgressions.
> 
> It's certainly a taste thing, but I think your taste is has a small minority that wants it. Like a heatless lower midcard match is a heatless lower card match rankings and records or not you know. Without a real story involved rankings alone mean nothing.
> 
> Even with Okada vs Naito I don't watch NJPW but I know that story is a competitive rivalry and about Naito finally reaching his destiny. And none of that needed an official always present W-L record with rankings to tell that story. You didn't need a record and ranking to understand the story of "Hey this guy Naito was supposed to be the guy, he failed at it. Okada stepped in and took that spot and flourished. Naito then becames this fuck it all kind of bitter guy. But now it's his chance to fulfill his destiny."


No offense,but all those things are things that people call into question about those particular works. At best, the Kane stuff is only a portion of what a structured story could accomplish. If Jericho's title matches actually had some meaning and fallout then I'd understand. But all that stuff is just forgotten when McMahon gets bored with it. This lack of consequences is why WWE isn't worth watching. 

I don't think this claim has been verified in history. If the company is committed to kayfabe and does it right, I think they'd get more fan engagement by virtue of feeling like a bigger deal than some isolated feud comprised of matches that even the top brass don't give a crap about. And as I said before, rankings just serve as a backdrop and dramatic context for any story you wish to tell. I think it would be easier to build heat in this framework than trying to make it out of whole cloth. I can't say it any plainer than that.

---

Naito's story would be impossible without the competitive structure of NJPW as a backdrop, a structure I'd argue is more complex than just a ranking system. (It's comprised of pretty much just a bunch of tournaments all with different stips and rewards)

If Naito's story was just on the back of somebody keying his car and he wanted to find out by, oddly enough, wrestling, none of that would ever amount to anything because it wont make any sense. 

Naito's story started as this weird mixure of Kayfabe and real life when NJPW allowed fans to vote whether the title match he earned through the G1 Climax should be lower on the card in favor of Tanahashi vs Nakamura after Naito had become less popular. This fake, unreal, kayfabe stipulation effected 6 years opf his character development. That's a crazy amount of depth, detail and worldbuilding you'd never find in a WWE ring. Ever.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Fuuuuuck..... just popped in for shits and giggles
> 
> this thread has some BOOKS written in them  ?


Sorry. I'm responsbile forlike 52 percent of that. ?


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

TKO Wrestling said:


> They are going wrong by not using an outside production team that eyeballs have never seen in wrestling before. If you watched WCW or TNA, you are seeing basically the same production as AEW. Now go watch something like the Victoria Secrets Fashion shows and see how different it looks. Or an awards show on TV. It is just completely different. I know TNT is providing this but it really has hurt AEW. People wanted different!!!
> 
> Kahn being so tight budgeted is the thing hurting them the most. They could be at twice the viewership right now if he would just open up the damn checkbook.


One more thing I forgot to mention. If AEW bring in a bunch of WWE talent that were released, had their contracts expire, or God forbid, actually want to leave WWE...

... would you be asking, or telling us the following:

WWE rejects aren't going to do anything to help them
LOL They signed "X"
All they got was a bunch of mid-card jobbers
What are they going to do with "X"

So which is it? A question or a viewpoint? It doesn't really matter because everything they do is stupid, right?

Now, go and get your fuckin' shine-box.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DOTL said:


> Sorry. I'm responsbile forlike 52 percent of that. ?


Mate, if it makes you happy - more power to you 

plus, you make some good points too ?‍♂


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Mate, if it makes you happy - more power to you
> 
> plus, you make some good points too ?‍♂


heh. I don't know about happy.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> No offense,but all those things are things that people call into question about those particular works. At best, the Kane stuff is only a portion of what a structured story could accomplish. If Jericho's title matches actually had some meaning and fallout then I'd understand. But all that stuff is just forgotten when McMahon gets bored with it. This lack of consequences is why WWE isn't worth watching.
> 
> I don't think this claim has been verified in history. If the company is committed to kayfabe and does it right, I think they'd get more fan engagement by virtue of feeling like a bigger deal than some isolated feud comprised of matches that even the top brass don't give a crap about. And as I said before, rankings just serve as a backdrop and dramatic context for any story you wish to tell. I think it would be easier to build heat in this framework than trying to make it out of whole cloth. I can't say it any plainer than that.
> 
> ...


But those stories are still beloved. Every story will have plot holes but as long as the end results and journey are enjoyable folk don't care. 

Naito's story could be just as compelling with a car keying if it's wrote well. Think of how many memorable moments come from wrestling ridiculousness. Austin quoting a Bible verse launched his career. Who ran over Austin was a big storyline. Hogan and Savage feuding over Savage being paranoid and jealous. Rock turning and joining the corporation because fans used to boo him. Matt and Edge feuding over the real life fucking Lita situation. 

You don't have to agree, but it clear people prefer a less rigid system that focuses more on the stories than seriously trying to present wrestling as the most legit competition ever. Wrestling isn't legit competition so it's just silly to impliment rigid systems that hinder that ability to tell stories.


There's plenty of story and world building in WWE and story based promotions in general. Something like what they did with Kofi this year going into Mania and during the Orton feud is just proof of that. Something like Kane's final feud with Taker or his promo on why he put Taker in a vegetative state show that. When they're on they are on. When they're off its not because that don't have a strict system it's because they dropped the ball.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

DOTL said:


> heh. I don't know about happy.


..... if you feel content.... wait, no, that‘s not it

if you get a blast of joy..... nope.... 

.....

if you irritate haters, then more power to you


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

LifeInCattleClass said:


> Fuuuuuck..... just popped in for shits and giggles
> 
> this thread has some BOOKS written in them  ?
> 
> ...


these guys are spending like 5-10 minutes on a post, imagine doing that.


----------



## dolphin1989 (Jan 7, 2020)

You know , we have yet to see Omega cut a promo, I've really not a fan of the butcher, the bunny, and the blade and I'm really not a big fan of that dinosaur faction as well.

I say some more no DQ hardcore falls county anywhere matches would be something worth adding.


----------



## Garty (Jul 29, 2007)

dolphin1989 said:


> You know , we have yet to see Omega cut a promo, I've really not a fan of the butcher, the bunny, and the blade and I'm really not a big fan of that dinosaur faction as well.
> 
> I say some more no DQ hardcore falls county anywhere matches would be something worth adding.


Hey, another "new" user. Not even 24 hours old. Business is good around here! 

Why does he need to cut a promo, if it's just going to be a promo? People are going to disagree, no matter what he says or does
I think we can all agree that BBB are uninspired at best
The Jurassic Express, as ridiculous as some people tell us they are, both Jungle Boy and Luchasaurus work hard, have that "it" factor, are over with the fans and are only going to improve upon their abilities in the years to come
More hardcore matches are not in the cards, at least not on TNT. With PPV's, sparingly and Dark, occasionally


----------



## dolphin1989 (Jan 7, 2020)

Garty said:


> Hey, another "new" user. Not even 24 hours old. Business is good around here!
> 
> Why does he need to cut a promo, if it's just going to be a promo? People are going to disagree, no matter what he says or does
> I think we can all agree that BBB are uninspired at best
> ...



Omega has had very little mic time despite being one of the biggest stars in the company, BBB it's early although I don't know I'm not fan, and as far as the Jurassic Express goes I don't know it could just be their gimmicks.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> But those stories are still beloved. Every story will have plot holes but as long as the end results and journey are enjoyable folk don't care.
> 
> Naito's story could be just as compelling with a car keying if it's wrote well. Think of how many memorable moments come from wrestling ridiculousness. Austin quoting a Bible verse launched his career. Who ran over Austin was a big storyline. Hogan and Savage feuding over Savage being paranoid and jealous. Rock turning and joining the corporation because fans used to boo him. Matt and Edge feuding over the real life fucking Lita situation.
> 
> ...



Honestly, WWE's never produced a* great *story, nothing close to the level of Sting vs Hogan would have been had the ending not been botched or the stuff you see at NJPW or NXT. You and many other people might have enjoyed them, but they weren't great. This is why people spend more time talking about the Montreal Screw Job and the Cliq kayfabe debacle than any particular WWE storyline in the 90s. This is because that stuff had a stronger narrative than anything McMahon booked. Stone Cold's creation wasn't so much a WWE storyline as it was a story of a real life dude Steve Austin, who traversed over WCW ECW and then resolved his experience into a great character in WWF. In terms of story he peaked when he refused to tapout to the sharpshooter, if we're honest, and has been riding that high ever sense. The Rock is a great character, but never had a great story to match. Good, but not great.

There's no evidence of what people prefer because outside of Japan, the stuff I'm talking about hasn't been tried. But I can speak for myself when I say when I was watch WK14, it felt likes way bigger deal than anything WWE produced. The quality of matches, the years of buildup and the prospects for the future all gravitate around that event, the institutions, and what it all means. 

Kofi's story was an accident that ended with him getting squashed after a boring title reign. All of the instances you bring up amounted to nothing. No long term effects, no overarching narrative. Just nothing. This is because of Vince's lack of commitment to the rules of their world. This is because they have zero structure. It feels like a variety show and everything is contingent on you enjoying the meaningless segments. I never did. It's not for me. Back in the 96/97 I'd always go to another TV my eyes every time my family would switch from WCW to RAW to see what was happening. I didn't care because I knew none of it would matter in a month.

I don't want AEW to emulate WWE because the main reason I watch it is because it doesn't have to. If you want that format, great. WWE's already doing it.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> Honestly, WWE's never produced a* great *story, nothing close to the level of Sting vs Hogan would have been had the ending not been botched or the stuff you see at NJPW or NXT. You and many other people might have enjoyed them, but they weren't great. This is why people spend more time talking about the Montreal Screw Job and the Cliq kayfabe debacle than any particular WWE storyline in the 90s. This is because that stuff had a stronger narrative than anything McMahon booked. Stone Cold's creation wasn't so much a WWE storyline as it was a story of a real life dude Steve Austin, who traversed over WCW ECW and then resolved his experience into a great character in WWF. In terms of story he peaked when he refused to tapout to the sharpshooter, if we're honest, and has been riding that high ever sense. The Rock is a great character, but never had a great story to match. Good, but not great.
> 
> There's no evidence of what people prefer because outside of Japan, the stuff I'm talking about hasn't been tried. But I can speak for myself when I say when I was watch WK14, it felt likes way bigger deal than anything WWE produced. The quality of matches, the years of buildup and the prospects for the future all gravitate around that event, the institutions, and what it all means.
> 
> ...


The first point on WWE never making a great storyline is pure bull shit. You're in a super minority on that one. Let's keep it all the way honest, there are far more revered WWE stories than there are NJPW stories or whatever promotion you prefer. Be it Hogan vs Andre, Hogan vs Savage, Macho Man and Elizabeth, Bret vs HBK, HBK realizing his dream, Austin vs McMahon, Austin vs Rock, Rock vs HHH, Taker and Kane's complicated relationship, HHH vs HBK, Cena's rise, Batista's rise, Eddie's rise, Benoit's rise, Jeff Hardy's Rise, Rey capturing the world title, Orton vs HHH, Jericho vs HBK, Taker vs HBK, The rise of Bryan, Kofi this year, Becky's the last 2 years there's plenty of great memorable stories the WWE have created. 

Your idea of amounting to something is even bull shit. How did Kofi's story amount to nothing? Whether or not Kofi got his shit pushed in by Brock doesn't negate what he did. He proved Vince, Dolph, KO, and Orton wrong about him not being good enough or deserving of his spot. Him not beating Brock doesn't invalidate any of that. That's you creating a negative because you admittedly don't like the WWE. But that doesn't change the fact that story and title reign certainly means something for his character. He will forever be a WWE champion and unlike a Jinder the fact that he has spent his entire career as some form of title contender let's you know he's a threat. 

The way you felt about WK 14 is how a stadium full of people felt about Becky and Kofi getting their just due this year. People have been watching Kofi in WWE over a decade. They remember his push getting squashed all over a botch that nobody would've noticed if it wasn't for Orton. Him finally getting his moment in the sun after a long career and all that success with The New Day meant something.

A lot of fans had felt like Becky was one of the best if not the best horsewoman for years. But they always felt she was getting pushed aside because she wasn't a blonde and Vince has something against her due to her accent. They had to watch her be pushed aside for Alexa, Charlotte, CARMELLA, and Charlotte again then for her to finally get to the top spot they felt she deserved while beating Charlotte and Ronda Rousey no less meant something. 

You don't have to personally like those moments but no denying they are big moments. Sure there was a competitive element to them. But what really gave it life was the beyond competition story. Fans didn't need to see that Becky was 22-12 going into SummerSlam 2018 to back her and feel like it was her time. Honestly your support of the W-L record and ranking thing seems to be more about you not liking WWE structure or devices than you actually supporting AEW's system. Because all of your knocks seem to be about how you think Vince failed out it, while ignoring the vast majority of promotions use the same loose format.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> The first point on WWE never making a great storyline is pure bull shit. You're in a super minority on that one. Let's keep it all the way honest, there are far more revered WWE stories than there are NJPW stories or whatever promotion you prefer. Be it Hogan vs Andre, Hogan vs Savage, Macho Man and Elizabeth, Bret vs HBK, HBK realizing his dream, Austin vs McMahon, Austin vs Rock, Rock vs HHH, Taker and Kane's complicated relationship, HHH vs HBK, Cena's rise, Batista's rise, Eddie's rise, Benoit's rise, Jeff Hardy's Rise, Rey capturing the world title, Orton vs HHH, Jericho vs HBK, Taker vs HBK, The rise of Bryan, Kofi this year, Becky's the last 2 years there's plenty of great memorable stories the WWE have created.
> 
> Your idea of amounting to something is even bull shit. How did Kofi's story amount to nothing? Whether or not Kofi got his shit pushed in by Brock doesn't negate what he did. He proved Vince, Dolph, KO, and Orton wrong about him not being good enough or deserving of his spot. Him not beating Brock doesn't invalidate any of that. That's you creating a negative because you admittedly don't like the WWE. But that doesn't change the fact that story and title reign certainly means something for his character. He will forever be a WWE champion and unlike a Jinder the fact that he has spent his entire career as some form of title contender let's you know he's a threat.
> 
> ...


1. It's a matter of opinion. So that can't be considered bullshit. Most of those aren't great storylines. Most of them are great moments strung together with stuff I guarantee you don't remember. Vague notions of feuds. An epic bodyslam in a boring match, and in the case of Austin and McMahon, just a bunch of stunners and Vince trying to put the screws to him. I don't give a crap about that. I will concede a few of those, especially regarding HBK and Savage. Kofi I will not concede because an ending is a part of a story and his ending blew hard and WWE didn't book any greatness it did have. Becky I will not concede because her story, like Bryan's, existed in spite of what WWE wanted to book. What they actually booked for her was garbage and is only starting to get hot again with Asuka. And Cena's rise? Please. Don't lump that mess with all that other stuff you mentioned. It's not helping your case.

2. I'll tell you how Kofi's didn't amount to anything. His title reign blew with KO being the only high spot(relatively speaking). Unless Kofi's winning the belt was the end of that story, they screwed the pooch hard in the third act. That'snot a GREAT story. And to prove this isn't just about me hating WWE, and I do, so I won't deny that, I was one of the few holdouts for Kofi when people started saying he sucked after winning. You can go into my old posts to verify that. He ate the F5 and now I agree. I'm sure he'd agree too. Nothing WWE does amounts to anything because that's not nor has ever been how Vincent K. McMahon works. You know it. I know it. I'm not watching wrestling so I can pop. I'm not watching so I can buy a shirt. But that's what VM wants. This is why we have crowds now that just sit there like idiots waiting for the next big moment. It's by design. This is why they're dead silent for the actual meat of the shows.

3. That's not a story. That's a metastory. People, including myself, rooted for Kofi because he was fed trash for years by his so-called employers. His rise was a complete accident that WWE booked correctly right up until he won and then proceeded to screw up afterwards. But let's look at the actual story. 

_Kofi makes a brilliant showing at EC(great match,I won't lie). Gets over as hell. After that VM comes out, throws out all these excuses and bull crap before he;s allowed to face Hippie Bryan. Wins. Nothing happens. Loses in 3 seconds. _

That's it. That all WWE booked. Kofi's meta-story was great...but WWE didn't write that. 

4. Once again great Meta-story. But what did WWE ACTUALLY book? A match(despite trying to make it just Charlotte and Rousey), a back and forth with Charlotte,and then a whole lot of nothing until recently. The best stuff about Becky was accidental and unintentional. Getting cheered when she was meant to be booed Getting punched in the face and looking like a badass. All great for her, but not a story WWE penned. 


5. Great moments. *Moments*. Moments aren't a story. In your more contemporary examples you lean on the irl circumstances to fill in for WWE's terrible and uncooperative booking. Many of those stories existed IN SPITE of Vince wanted. Bryan, Kofi, Becky, come to mind My belief in the ranking system has less to do with hating WWE and more to do with avoiding why I hate it in the first place. AEW's system isn't where it needs to be, so you're right. I don't really support that either. But I want to, so I can leave WWE behind me for good.

I think you need to understand why I hate WWE in the first place before we go further. 

There have been many times, especially when WCW folded, that my favorite wrestlers had to adopt less impactful wrestling styles, stupid gimmicks, get put in a corner for being smaller, what have you. Competetion gave way to Vince's retarded baby sense of humor, gooftard creative acumen, and inability to commit to anything. And no, no other company operate's like WWE's format. Just ask TNA. They tried and failed. It may not be my ideal format,but it sho ain't Vince's loose booking 15 minutes before lights, type bullcrap. 

But no. This isn't about WWE. I'd be content with watching NJPW, Powerr, and AEW. This is about taking wrestling to new heights and actually achieve greatness. WWE's model can't cut it. 
Sorry.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. It's a matter of opinion. So that can't be considered bullshit. Most of those aren't great storylines. Most of them are great moments strung together with stuff I guarantee you don't remember. Vague notions of feuds. An epic bodyslam in a boring match, and in the case of Austin and McMahon, just a bunch of stunners and Vince trying to put the screws to him. I don't give a crap about that. I will concede a few of those, especially regarding HBK and Savage. Kofi I will not concede because an ending is a part of a story and his ending blew hard and WWE didn't book any greatness it did have. Becky I will not concede because her story, like Bryan's, existed in spite of what WWE wanted to book. What they actually booked for her was garbage and is only starting to get hot again with Asuka. And Cena's rise? Please. Don't lump that mess with all that other stuff you mentioned. It's not helping your case.
> 
> 2. I'll tell you how Kofi's didn't amount to anything. His title reign blew with KO being the only high spot(relatively speaking). Unless Kofi's winning the belt was the end of that story, they screwed the pooch hard in the third act. That'snot a GREAT story. And to prove this isn't just about me hating WWE, and I do, so I won't deny that, I was one of the few holdouts for Kofi when people started saying he sucked after winning. You can go into my old posts to verify that. He ate the F5 and now I agree. I'm sure he'd agree too. Nothing WWE does amounts to anything because that's not nor has ever been how Vincent K. McMahon works. You know it. I know it. I'm not watching wrestling so I can pop. I'm not watching so I can buy a shirt. But that's what VM wants. This is why we have crowds now that just sit there like idiots waiting for the next big moment. It's by design. This is why they're dead silent for the actual meat of the shows.
> 
> ...


WWE's model can't cut it yet they're still light years ahead of the competition in relevance and reverence. NJPW, Powerr, nor AEW are actually taking wrestling to new heights. The latter 2 can't even crack a million despite AEW being an entertaining show. NJPW has been around just as long as WWE and has barely over 100k subscribers on their streaming service. You can like all of those better that's certainly fair enough. But in reality none of these places are actually causing this grand change you desire. 

You can talk about how a lot of what I named weren't great stories, but great moments. But the truth is through sheer relevance of promotion something like Kofi's run to Mania is going to be much more remembered than Naito finally reaching the top again at Wrestle Kingdom. That might sound crazy on a place like here for hardcore fans but it's simply the truth of things. 

Even with "well Vince didn't intend to do X, Y, and Z he just fell into it" what does it matter if he started paying attention and executed? I don't have to watch NJPW to know Gedo surely didn't intend for Naito's first major push to fail. But if he was able to go with the flow and turn it into gold what does it matter in the end? 

And I'm not talking about rewriting shit at the last minute that silly. Which is my point with you overly focusing on the worst aspects of WWE to make your point on why this silly W/L and ranking system is needed. The system I'm talking about is booking wrestling like it's a story based thing and not hindering yourself by doing silly stuff like a hard w/l record and rankings to feign competition. There's a reason you can't point to a promotion that year round works on such a strict format. It's easy for NJPW to write stories with an upcoming tournament in mind. It's an entirely different thing using that format year round


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

1. WWE is falling like a rock, as it should be as long as Vince is running things. They are a joke on the main stage, and no one except WWE marks take them seriously. There seniority is not something to be proud of considering that it should have been much higher, and is the fallout from Hogan and Stone Cold's *meteoric* popularity, but they've been on the decline since then. Second, you commit a bit of a strawman here. I never said that these company have brought wrestling to new heights. I said they can bring it to new heights by rejecting old strategies. To quote CM Punk. This is about disproving this idea that WWE Vince McMahon is the best. Heck so could WWE could be responsible for that.. .as long as Vince is in a retirement home. 

2.Who cares if it's more remembered. Memory is a funny thing in these internet days. No one had ever heard of Plastic Love.. .until they did. Naito's stuff is better. That's all that matters. (And this is no strike against Kofi. it isn't his fault, and I'm still pissed about that stupid ending.)

3. That's not the same and you know it. Vince actively fought popular consensus in the case of Bryan and Becky.And when he did concede,he didn't book anything compelling. With Kofi, he just milked the heat and thoughly buried him when he was done. Gedo, on the other hand, booked the heck out of some lemons and turned them into lemonade, slowly and meticulously over 6 years building a NARRATIVE and not just a series of moments to pop to. Neither Kofi or Becky are likely to hold their heat for that long (In Kofi's case it's all but evaporated already.) Bryan is so good that he shines in spite of the crap WWE feeds him. So kudos for him. 

4.The year round point is moot. NJPW is literally nothing but tournaments year round. A western wrestling show is comprised of a card of matches and I've already done the math to show that G1 Climax has enough matches to provide two Heavy Wieght Ranked bouts for almost every week of the year. That'snot including non title matches and matches in other divisions. 

I'll go about it like this. Answer these questions *without breaking kayfabe*, the type of questions you should be able to answer for the basic setting of any decent story.
What is the WWE?
What does a wrestler do? What is their job?
What's the general purpose of a wrestling match?
When not a champion, what does a wrestler do that helps change that?

If this is about story, you should be able to answer these basic questions without mention fans, ratings, or bookers.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> WWE's model . . .


I reply above.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. WWE is falling like a rock, as it should be as long as Vince is running things. They are a joke on the main stage, and no one except WWE marks take them seriously. There seniority is not something to be proud of considering that it should have been much higher, and is the fallout from Hogan and Stone Cold's *meteoric* popularity, but they've been on the decline since then. Second, you commit a bit of a strawman here. I never said that these company have brought wrestling to new heights. I said they can bring it to new heights by rejecting old strategies. To quote CM Punk. This is about disproving this idea that WWE Vince McMahon is the best. Heck so could WWE could be responsible for that.. .as long as Vince is in a retirement home.
> 
> 2.Who cares if it's more remembered. Memory is a funny thing in these internet days. No one had ever heard of Plastic Love.. .until they did. Naito's stuff is better. That's all that matters. (And this is no strike against Kofi. it isn't his fault, and I'm still pissed about that stupid ending.)
> 
> ...


1. Falling like a rock based on what when they're getting some of their biggest deals ever. One thing folk have to stop doing is playing double standards when it comes to shit like ratings and such. Any standard of falling typically leveled against them also applies to their competition. AEW at its worst has loss half of it's viewing audience at best 500k it are they calling like a rock? Or justus it just how TV works these days. Because it seems like these things switch depending on whether WWE is the topic. You can say no one takes them serious, try by your own admission your entire world view on wrestling is shaped by them. Because again half of your arguments are based on what WWE does and why people need to do to not be them. Sure 

2. Who cares if it's more remembered??? Well if it's more remembered especially since it's a positive remembering then clearly it's loved more as a great story. 

3. It is the same thing though, it's rolling with the flow. Plus let's not over credit Gedo was this some 6 year purposeful building, or was it him realizing well shit we can't put Okada over again. I mean they already used the very over Okada to destroy Omega and Naito's momentum before. 

4. 

1. Wrestling promotion
2. They wrestle
3. To win a match
4. Wrestle matches

But the reason those questions aren't the checkmate you want is because while based on a competition the most important part is the story telling. And a strict semi realistic competitive system isn't constructive to that generally speaking.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. Falling like a rock based on what when they're getting some of their biggest deals ever. One thing folk have to stop doing is playing double standards when it comes to shit like ratings and such. Any standard of falling typically leveled against them also applies to their competition. AEW at its worst has loss half of it's viewing audience at best 500k it are they calling like a rock? Or justus it just how TV works these days. Because it seems like these things switch depending on whether WWE is the topic. You can say no one takes them serious, try by your own admission your entire world view on wrestling is shaped by them. Because again half of your arguments are based on what WWE does and why people need to do to not be them. Sure
> 
> 2. Who cares if it's more remembered??? Well if it's more remembered especially since it's a positive remembering then clearly it's loved more as a great story.
> 
> ...


1.AEW has seemed to stabilize after falling from a hot debut(something people expected to happen, calling it a honeymoon phase). It'll be a long time before they get WWE numbers, unless WWE continues to hemorrhage. The reason I hold WWE to different standard, and I do, is because people often use it's ratings as testament they are indeed the standard. I don't even think AEW is doing anything special that should give them a better rating. They have a lot of work to do. But WWE having a bigger rating isn't any indication that what they're doing is "what people want." If so, less people want it by the week. I don't take WWE's content seriously. I take Vince McMahon's poisonous, career destroying creative sense and promotional reach as an ambassador for the art of wrestling seriously.

2.I'm sure many people remember it, but not for the good reasons you're trying to spin. They didn't even care when he ate the pin. Not as much as they should have.

3.If this is indeed what happened,the fact that Gedo came to that realization should alone be a credit to him over WWE creative. Anyway, the dude planned it. It's obvious. Even Naito's disdain for the IC belt was factored into WK. Who thinks about details like that in the wrestling world?

4. If you can't see my point now, answer this one without kayfabe or a tautology
*Why win a match? What do you get if you do?*
I keep hearing that storytelling is the most important thing, but you're struggling to answer these four basic questions about WWE's story without being vague. Imagine if Rocky was described as: He's a boxer who wants to win a match. Please tell me you understand how ludicrousy generic that is This is becoming dangerously close to an argument saying that WWE having substance is detrimental to its story telling. 

_BTW, before I forget. A lot of the earlier stuff WWE did had the benefit of kayfabe to the point Hacksaw Jim Duggan and the Iron Shiek got in trouble for breaking it._


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

(Commentary) Looks like the AEW World Debate Championship is now a 3-Way as @RapShepard has entered the ring to square off with @DOTL while @The Wood is spending some time regrouping on the outside. Who will win this classic folks! Find out on AEW Dynamite! (End Commentary)


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1.AEW has seemed to stabilize after falling from a hot debut(something people expected to happen, calling it a honeymoon phase). It'll be a long time before they get WWE numbers, unless WWE continues to hemorrhage. The reason I hold WWE to different standard, and I do, is because people often use it's ratings as testament they are indeed the standard. I don't even think AEW is doing anything special that should give them a better rating. They have a lot of work to do. But WWE having a bigger rating isn't any indication that what they're doing is "what people want." If so, less people want it by the week. I don't take WWE's content seriously. I take Vince McMahon's poisonous, career destroying creative sense and promotional reach as an ambassador for the art of wrestling seriously.
> 
> 2.I'm sure many people remember it, but not for the good reasons you're trying to spin. They didn't even care when he ate the pin. Not as much as they should have.
> 
> ...


1. But if WWE is this joke that no one takes serious, then what is the rest of the wrestling world that gets a fraction of the views? It's hard to argue that whatever you're arguing for is what people want or could take the business to the next level when nothing is supporting that at the moment. While WWE certainly isn't perfect, but nothing the competition is doing seems to be captivating audiences either. So I'm left to believe they don't want that either?

2. Nah folk are going to remember it for the epic Mania moment. It's no different than how folk that like Eddie remember his title win more than his lost to JBL. How Jericho beating Austin and Rock in one night more than him losing to HHH. Or how Mankind putting butts in seats is more remembered than the fact he had a short title reign. Only sticklers like us fans here remember any and everything. 

3. He planned all along to throw away white hot Omega and Naito momentum to give it to a less over Naito. That's what you're arguing he did?

4. I answered your questions very clearly and nothing was vague. Folk wrestle because they're wrestlers. Stories give them more reasons to wrestle beyond the boring system you're arguing for. I guarantee you if you asked somebody 

"Hey do you want to watch this match with 2 guys fighting over the number 6 ranking or this match over the custody of this child". Folk are going with the latter more often than not. Because even with your examples given none were dependent on a ranking system and official record. That shit just isn't needed.


----------



## MetalKiwi (Sep 2, 2013)

Maybe they could test out some of the gimmick matches that rarely get used these days?

Casket Match
First Blood Match
Fans Bring the Weapons match
Scaffold match
Loser Leaves Town match
Strap Match
etc....

Put their own twist on it of course. Or make up new ones.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

DOTL said:


> *1. It's a matter of opinion. So that can't be considered bullshit.* Most of those aren't great storylines. Most of them are great moments strung together with stuff I guarantee you don't remember. Vague notions of feuds. An epic bodyslam in a boring match, and in the case of Austin and McMahon, just a bunch of stunners and Vince trying to put the screws to him. I don't give a crap about that. I will concede a few of those, especially regarding HBK and Savage. Kofi I will not concede because an ending is a part of a story and his ending blew hard and WWE didn't book any greatness it did have. Becky I will not concede because her story, like Bryan's, existed in spite of what WWE wanted to book. What they actually booked for her was garbage and is only starting to get hot again with Asuka. And Cena's rise? Please. Don't lump that mess with all that other stuff you mentioned. It's not helping your case.
> 
> 2. I'll tell you how Kofi's didn't amount to anything. His title reign blew with KO being the only high spot(relatively speaking). Unless Kofi's winning the belt was the end of that story, they screwed the pooch hard in the third act. That'snot a GREAT story. And to prove this isn't just about me hating WWE, and I do, so I won't deny that, I was one of the few holdouts for Kofi when people started saying he sucked after winning. You can go into my old posts to verify that. He ate the F5 and now I agree. I'm sure he'd agree too. Nothing WWE does amounts to anything because that's not nor has ever been how Vincent K. McMahon works. You know it. I know it. I'm not watching wrestling so I can pop. I'm not watching so I can buy a shirt. But that's what VM wants. This is why we have crowds now that just sit there like idiots waiting for the next big moment. It's by design. This is why they're dead silent for the actual meat of the shows.
> 
> ...


I hate this. Opinions can be wrong. Opinions can absolutely be bullshit. Especially terrible opinions like the one you posed.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Cult03 said:


> I hate this. Opinions can be wrong. Opinions can absolutely be bullshit. Especially terrible opinions like the one you posed.


Jeez. I didn't think something was great. I didn't say it was bad. I didn't say it wasn't even good. I said it wasn't great. I conceded on some of the Savage and HBK *storylines*. But apart from that, much of the stuff he listed were just things I'd consider great moments.What the heck do you want from me? 

What's bullshit is that someone has to have the same taste as you. I've said time and time again I was never a big WWE guy. Do you think I was joking around when I said that? Do you think I was joshing?



RapShepard said:


> 1. But if WWE is this joke that no one takes serious, then what is the rest of the wrestling world that gets a fraction of the views? It's hard to argue that whatever you're arguing for is what people want or could take the business to the next level when nothing is supporting that at the moment. While WWE certainly isn't perfect, but nothing the competition is doing seems to be captivating audiences either. So I'm left to believe they don't want that either?
> 
> 2. Nah folk are going to remember it for the epic Mania moment. It's no different than how folk that like Eddie remember his title win more than his lost to JBL. How Jericho beating Austin and Rock in one night more than him losing to HHH. Or how Mankind putting butts in seats is more remembered than the fact he had a short title reign. Only sticklers like us fans here remember any and everything.
> 
> ...


1.It's more nuanced than that. A lot of problems come from WWE doing nothing to grow wrestling as a whole. They help kill the territories, they bought and dismantled 2 competitors,they don't strike deals with other promotions, and they do nothing warrants an increased interest in wrestling. This makes it harder for smaller companies to get exposure. WWE has all the exposure in the world. People care less and less about it. Without the blessing that is the internet, no one would know about the other companies as much as they do. This is why AEW is important. It's in the best psotition to get out from under WWE's shadow.



2. You assume too much. It seems to me people have already forgotten by virtue of the way WWE booked his title reign as unimportant, not its length. They made it seem that it wasn't important, a joke even. "WM moments" don't mean as much as they were branded to mean this day in age because people have a short memory for real events let alone fake ones, and they really don't mean much if the WWE marketing machine doesn't care enough to make them mean anything.

WWE doesn't have the same resonance it once had even in the 2000s, because it's power to captivate people's minds has diminished greatly due to the internet.


3.I'm arguing that Naito's comeback was planned. I'll admit you can't plan for everything, that doesn't work in life, why would it work in wrestling? Doesn't stop you for sitting your butt down for a few hours and plot something. Writers do that all the time.

4.They wrestle because they're wrestlers is circular. I told you, no tautologies.

That being said, your answers,as far as WWE is concerned, are right. And that's why their stories suck in general. The company is just a place where matches happen for no reason and characters sit around waiting for things to happen. It relies on your foreknowledge that wrestling is a thing people do to sell the story. normies don't give a crap because they ether don't know or don't care about that information because its presented as unimportant. This is why, I think, they don't watch wrestling but come(sometimes) to the stupid crap.

5. I'm sorry. We're from two different worlds. A guy fighting a wrestling match for custody is also literally what people think of when they think about the dumbest stuff in wrestling. There is no way you can argue with a straight face that that is either better, simpler, or more of a draw than a guy trying to place for a title. The moment people tell you it's a wrestling match they'll probably laugh at you.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Anyone who uses the word "nuanced" is usually a mark for themselves. Just saying...



DOTL said:


> How entertaining I am to you is not my concern. So this is a wasted comment.
> 
> You keep saying that the solution is to not make bad content. This is what the dog analogy was for. I'm talking about* how* to not make bad content. In short, every problem in wrestling stories stems from the breakdown of kayfabe.There's literally no setting, no situational context, and thus no goal/motivation for the wrestlers leading into these feuds. They just walk around in some post-modern,"I'm working for a wrestling company. Everything is fake" sort of way, until someone is booked to piss someone off. This forces them in to mostly terrible feuds that don't move the needle because they have to be generated for reasons the format of the show didn't take time to establish.
> 
> ...


It's of concern to me, because it reflects your appreciation of what is entertaining and what is not. I'm not going to hear storyline pitches from someone who can't write an entertaining storyline. 

And your *how* is exactly the problem. I am telling you that it _will not work for North American/western audiences_. They do not prefer stories about rankings and win-losses records over "I hate you, motherfucker -- you stole my girlfriend!" They give more of a shit about that visceral stuff. Elements of competition can be embedded within match psychology and brought up at relevant points by commentators. They don't need to be the central focus of your plot points. Ew.



RapShepard said:


> A number by a name in of itself doesn't make things inherently more interesting for most people. You can say something like Jericho spilling coffee on Kane is a stupid reason for a feud, but I'd say it's more interesting than throwing folk out there because they're the 7th and 8th ranked wrestler. It's especially more interesting when you put it in context. Kane wasn't upset about the coffee, he was upset and overreacting because Jericho said "hey hope I didn't burn you". Which played into Kane's backstory of being a burn victim and showed how unhinged he could be. That's a lot more interesting for a midcard feud than just fighting for a number.
> 
> Wrestling shouldn't rely on basic things like rankings and W/L records because wrestling can make itself more interesting than that. The reasons actual sports are always looking for a story is because a story involved is much more interesting than competition for competition sake. Now real sports can get away with it because they're real competition at the end of the day. But wrestling shouldn't concern themselves with that.


Halle-fucking-lulah! Someone gets it! Wrestling, when it's done right, is far more interesting than statistics. I don't even hate statistics when it comes to data and all that sort of stuff. Just keep it out of wrestling content. It's unnecessary. 



Garty said:


> Hey, another "new" user. Not even 24 hours old. Business is good around here!
> 
> Why does he need to cut a promo, if it's just going to be a promo? People are going to disagree, no matter what he says or does
> I think we can all agree that BBB are uninspired at best
> ...


Can you seriously shut the fuck up and stop bullying people who sign up to the boards and just want to discuss things? Why is it important to you when anyone signs up? You do realize that people have to sign up at some point in time. 



DOTL said:


> Honestly, WWE's never produced a* great *story, nothing close to the level of Sting vs Hogan would have been had the ending not been botched or the stuff you see at NJPW or NXT. You and many other people might have enjoyed them, but they weren't great. This is why people spend more time talking about the Montreal Screw Job and the Cliq kayfabe debacle than any particular WWE storyline in the 90s. This is because that stuff had a stronger narrative than anything McMahon booked. Stone Cold's creation wasn't so much a WWE storyline as it was a story of a real life dude Steve Austin, who traversed over WCW ECW and then resolved his experience into a great character in WWF. In terms of story he peaked when he refused to tapout to the sharpshooter, if we're honest, and has been riding that high ever sense. The Rock is a great character, but never had a great story to match. Good, but not great.
> 
> There's no evidence of what people prefer because outside of Japan, the stuff I'm talking about hasn't been tried. But I can speak for myself when I say when I was watch WK14, it felt likes way bigger deal than anything WWE produced. The quality of matches, the years of buildup and the prospects for the future all gravitate around that event, the institutions, and what it all means.
> 
> ...


Austin/Bret was fucking amazing. Most of the time, Austin and Vince was, as well. Hogan and Andre told an amazing story. Savage and Flair? Savage and Hogan? Savage and Warrior? The Undertaker and Kane (whatever you think of their matches)? Brock and Rey just recently was really good. Bret and Owen. Jerry Lawler and Bret Hart, for crying out loud. Even Bret and Diesel had a bit of a good story between them. HBK/Taker. HBK/Austin. Austin and Tyson! Austin and Tyson! What the fuck do you think a story is?


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I kind of skimmed over the point that WWE is on the downturn while ignoring that AEW has lost almost half its regular viewers. Raw got 2.39 million viewers. That's about three times the AEW audience. You can't just ignore that when it comes to what people want to see. Popular doesn't mean good, and I'm not saying that Raw is good, but when it comes to getting eyeballs, you can't really mock Raw when AEW is sitting on about 800k average, or whatever.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Anyone who uses the word "nuanced" is usually a mark for themselves. Just saying...


Pot Kettle Black.

Dude. It's a word. Nobody cares except for you.





> It's of concern to me, because it reflects your appreciation of what is entertaining and what is not. I'm not going to hear storyline pitches from someone who can't write an entertaining storyline.
> 
> And your *how* is exactly the problem. I am telling you that it _will not work for North American/western audiences_. They do not prefer stories about rankings and win-losses records over "I hate you, motherfucker -- you stole my girlfriend!" They give more of a shit about that visceral stuff. Elements of competition can be embedded within match psychology and brought up at relevant points by commentators. They don't need to be the central focus of your plot points. Ew.


It takes a fair bit of stupidity to confuse debate for narrative. So you're either joking, or you're an idiot. Choose. 

I don't know why I'm going to do this, But I will. 

I don't want the stories to be about numbers. I want the stories to be about the characters caring about their numbers, ranks and championships, like wrestlers are supposed to. Basic wrestling crap. I literally say if you want to throw in a stupid beer truck, have at it. just don't make spectacle the story.

You don't know what people want, and neither do I, but only one of us is speaking for everyone. You. I just want someone to *try* an honest to goodness attempt and I think people might like it. I don't understand why it has to be all or nothing. RAW comes on Mondays or whatever the heck time in Australia. If you don't want anything different. Watch that. They need the ratings





> Austin/Bret was fucking amazing. Most of the time, Austin and Vince was, as well. Hogan and Andre told an amazing story. Savage and Flair? Savage and Hogan? Savage and Warrior? The Undertaker and Kane (whatever you think of their matches)? Brock and Rey just recently was really good. Bret and Owen. Jerry Lawler and Bret Hart, for crying out loud. Even Bret and Diesel had a bit of a good story between them. HBK/Taker. HBK/Austin. Austin and Tyson! Austin and Tyson! What the fuck do you think a story is?


Austin and Bret was pretty good. The match they had I would say was amazing. Anyway, how much of that stuff you'd call GREAT? Not good, not very good. But GREAT. If you had a booking school and had a class on story (God help those kids) which one of these stories would you analyze for their benefit as a template for future stories? 

And what I think a story is.Hmmm.

A story is an oral, written, or performed account of a person, place, institution, that usually involves a beginning, middle, or end, and made up of a series of events that have some sort of temporal or logical order or thematic relationship to one another. Often times stories are either character driven, comprised of the choices of a proactive protagonist, or plot driven, comprised of events the character must react to. Ideally the story has a set up, an inciting incident, rising action, climax, falling action and a denouement, but that's a western structure, so it's not universal. (In japan they sometime use Kishotenketsu: a four part structure that has a twist in the third act) Despite the differences in structure around the world, one popular theory is that every story in some way relates to the monomyth Joseph Campbell called, "The Hero's Journey." This involves a character being at home, leaving, finding trouble, learning from a mentor, "dying" "resurrecting," killing a "dragon" returning home a different person. 

A lot of stories do different things, and play with the "rules", but one thing they have in common is. . .

characters usually don't walk around backstage until they scuff someone's sneakers and then have to fight a wrestling match for some reason. Unless Kafka wrote it.

But that's just my opinion. I might be wrong.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

Why on earth would anyone want to watch a wrestling show based on legitimacy with rankings and what-not when you can just watch UFC, you know, the real thing. Or boxing. Or judo.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

DOTL said:


> Jeez. I didn't think something was great. I didn't say it was bad. I didn't say it wasn't even good. I said it wasn't great. I conceded on some of the Savage and HBK *storylines*. But apart from that, much of the stuff he listed were just things I'd consider great moments.What the heck do you want from me?
> 
> What's bullshit is that someone has to have the same taste as you. I've said time and time again I was never a big WWE guy. Do you think I was joking around when I said that? Do you think I was joshing?


What's bullshit is claiming something as fact then saying opinions can't be wrong. I hope people aren't raising their children to think this way. It was my main point, hence why it was highlighted. But you not thinking there were any great story lines is just flat out wrong as well. Even 10-15 minute stories told in the ring have been great. There doesn't necessarily have to be an end point but Kofi's chase for the championship was great viewing. Nobody expects Golden Globe level acting and story telling from fucking wrestling but if a story entertains you and is memorable 20-30 years later then it has to be a great story. 

"You and many other people might have enjoyed them, but they weren't great" is you making it a fact by the way.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> Jeez. I didn't think something was great. I didn't say it was bad. I didn't say it wasn't even good. I said it wasn't great. I conceded on some of the Savage and HBK *storylines*. But apart from that, much of the stuff he listed were just things I'd consider great moments.What the heck do you want from me?
> 
> What's bullshit is that someone has to have the same taste as you. I've said time and time again I was never a big WWE guy. Do you think I was joking around when I said that? Do you think I was joshing?
> 
> ...


1. No it's not really nuanced at all. It's not WWE's job to keep competition alive and strike deals with them. WCW and ECW should've never been in the position for WWE to pay them in the first place. If people were just looking for different wrestling there's been other promotions to check out the entire time. 

2. No you're essentially playing dumb no offense. You know damn well folk haven't forgotten that moment. Especially when it's been in discussion of best moment of the year. People don't forget moments like that despite you wanting to pretend they do. 

3. You got to pick a road man did he purposefully from the beginning plan for Naito's journey to be 6 years or not. 

4 and 5. The honest truth is be people who aren't die hard wrestling fans that are open to willing to give it a chance care way more about fun and story than they do presenting it as a strict competition. There's a reason the business was hottest when you had the super American beating back foreigners and the heel of the year. There's a reason it got hot again when an alleged invasion by the competition was happening. There's a reason WWF got hot with "hey this guy is fighting back against the boss". Absurd stories sell way more than wrestling for competition. During each of those booms people understood the conflict would be settled in the ring with a wrestling match. People didn't need a ranking system and record keeping to understand who were the top guys or heroes and villains and shit like that. 

You or anyone else can argue that using wrestling needs more rigid systems involved, but until that works you have no real legs to stand on.


----------



## BigCy (Nov 10, 2012)

MetalKiwi said:


> Maybe they could test out some of the gimmick matches that rarely get used these days?
> 
> Casket Match
> First Blood Match
> ...


I'm all about them doing certain gimmick matches if they're not overly done and not corny like "Chair on a pole Match" or something like that. The only one I wouldn't do is "fans bring the weapons" and "casket match." I'm hoping they do an old 80's NWA style cage match for the upcoming cage match.

I think 1 gimmick match per show/event would be enough but it can be good if they do it right. They need to have context to though, no point in having 2 random guys in a death match without any storybuilding. First blood, cage, death, loser leaves, etc. need to be a culmination of a blood feud or a personal grudge not just a random match.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Anyone who defends WWE refusing to grow the business can fuck off. If you love pro wrestling, then it is a solemn duty to root for the growth of the business, its promotions, and its stars. WWE going out of its way to prevent major stars from growing too popular, as a way to prevent a competitor being created overnight, is a big part of the problem today.

Fuck Vince McMahon. And fuck anyone that has no issue with what he has done for nearly the last 2 decades. Fucking prick can rot in hell for all I care.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. No it's ...


1. If you're the industry leader it's partially your job to take care of the industry. WWE's practices are one of the biggest reasons wrestling as a whole is in decline. It could have leveraged the WCW brand to create the illusion of competition, while owning everything behind the scenes. But Vince and his butthurt ego ruined it for everyone. They could do their best to make TV people want to see, thus showing other networks that wrestling is something that is viable. But no, it essentially killed wrestling and put it's brand of "sports entertainment" in its place by refusing to allow fans cheer for who they want, feeding new talent to Cena, and booking everything into the grave. And don't mention Fox. I'm positive they already regret it. If WWE was pulling 8m like it used to, do you think that'd be better or worse for the industry? 

2. You're making a premature argument. I know you think you're right but evidence suggests otherwise. Kofi's pop is no different than it was before his title run. After Bryan's thing, the crowd never responded the same to him again. Even Becky. Both those things are older than Kofi's WM story, yet they feel, at least to some extent, as if they had some permanent effect on the crowd perception of the characters that remains to this day. Not so for Kofi. you'd think if they remembered the quality of Kofi's WM run, they would act as if they did. 

3. False dilemma. Go ask Oda, the creator of One Piece, if he ever needed to make an audible in a story that anyone reading could tell was planned for quite some time. There are several interviews of him saying things along this line. When details are called back years after they were set, they usually don't happen by accident, that doesn't mean there was no flexibility or overhauls. 

4. All the examples you mention have one thing in common. Larger than life guys with 10/10 charisma. It wasn't the storylines bringing people in. It was literal wrestling megastars doing that. The "storylines" were icing on the cake. I say this because both Austin and Hogan were huge before their storylines took place. Hogan's popularity came from a movie that had nothing to do with the WWF. Austin was a fan favorite when he was still supposed to be a bad guy. (If the story was the draw why was the wrong guy cheered for?) McMahon capitalized on that popularity, which is why you think the stuff they did was the best thing since sliced bread (he's good that way.)

Like I said, you guys have this all or nothing mentality. As if there's one way to do things. I've said it once,and I'll say it again. Everything you say is conjecture until it's actually proven in the market what people are willing to see. I think if people can watch sports, which are way more poplar than wrestling ever was, they can watch a sports based wrestling story if it's done right. If you want sensationalism, WWE's got you.



Cult03 said:


> *What's bullshit is claiming something as fact then saying opinions can't be wrong.* I hope people aren't raising their children to think this way. It was my main point, hence why it was highlighted. *But you not thinking there were any great story lines is just flat out wrong as well. *...
> 
> "You and many other people might have enjoyed them, but they weren't great" is you making it a fact by the way.


You literally do what you're complaining about within the length of two sentences, and let me explain how by refactoring your sentence with an opinion you don't agree with. 

"*But you thinking there were  not any great story lines is just flat out wrong as well. *"

If I was to say this, a sentence you wrote with literally one word removed,you'd submit it as evidence I'm doing what you're accusing me of. Don't be a hypocrite. Here's the thing. I never said anyone was wrong in thinking that WWE stories were great. I just don't personally think so. I will concede that such a point is debatable, or even unpopular. I don't care. I can live with that. You on the other hand are calling my opinion wrong simply because it contradicts your opinion. You're the one who thinks his opinion is fact.

Let me explain to you why I don't think WWE stories are great. Most of them have no arc, usually missing a set up and putting all the chips on the resolution for the sake of instant gratification("WM moment"). Most of the time characters remain flat and one dimensional. They never last longer than a PPV season. And they never have any long term effect on the characters. They come off as a string of scenarios without any logical connective tissue. And some of the scenarios work really well. But a mediocre movie with a great scene is still mediocre.

After thinking about it, I was perhaps too hard on the Hogan vs Andre thing, and allowed the overhype for the match(which wasn't great) distort that it had good storytelling. Andre had a pretty good motive, so you can add them to the exceptions I mention.But I still think the Sting story was better than any of these because it checks off more of my criteria. Sting literally changed his gimmick throughout the beginning of the story to reflect his character's cynicism with the whole situation, disappeared for a long time(this was a top guy mind you) and returned not saying a dang thing in the coolest way possible The story was a logical progression from Hogan's heel turn. Sting, despite being a babyface, came off as a tweener simply because you didn't know what he'd do. NWO were the greatest villains in wrestling history and String was operating in the shadows, trying to dismantle them. This story was developed over a YEAR,and despite being flashy, it all made sense.

That's a great story marred only by a literal botch in the ring at its conclusion. 

I don't think wrestling stories have to be Schindler's List quality to be great, but I know they can be better than what we normally see. So I'm not willing to throw around the word great because of pops.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> Why on earth would anyone want to watch a wrestling show based on legitimacy with rankings and what-not when you can just watch UFC, you know, the real thing. Or boxing. Or judo.


Why watch wrestling for cheesy drama? Why not watch Real Housewives or Maury.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. If you're the industry leader it's partially your job to take care of the industry. WWE's practices are one of the biggest reasons wrestling as a whole is in decline. It could have leveraged the WCW brand to create the illusion of competition, while owning everything behind the scenes. But Vince and his butthurt ego ruined it for everyone. They could do their best to make TV people want to see, thus showing other networks that wrestling is something that is viable. But no, it essentially killed wrestling and put it's brand of "sports entertainment" in its place by refusing to allow fans cheer for who they want, feeding new talent to Cena, and booking everything into the grave. And don't mention Fox. I'm positive they already regret it. If WWE was pulling 8m like it used to, do you think that'd be better or worse for the industry?
> 
> 2. You're making a premature argument. I know you think you're right but evidence suggests otherwise. Kofi's pop is no different than it was before his title run. After Bryan's thing, the crowd never responded the same to him again. Even Becky. Both those things are older than Kofi's WM story, yet they feel, at least to some extent, as if they had some permanent effect on the crowd perception of the characters that remains to this day. Not so for Kofi. you'd think if they remembered the quality of Kofi's WM run, they would act as if they did.
> 
> ...


1. It's not their job to do anything for the industry as a whole. The suggestion that they should've kept WCW running on to create the illusion of competition is silly when it's known that TNN/Spike TV wouldn't let him run wrestling content on another TV network 









411MANIA | Chris Jericho and Dave Meltzer Discuss Turner Wanting Vince McMahon To Buy and Run WCW As Separate Company in 2000, Vince’s Attempt to Sell Spike TV On The Idea


Vince McMahon reportedly attempted to purchase WCW way back in 2000, which would've allowed him to run WCW on the Turner Networks and channels.




411mania.com





It's also silly on the basis of how long could they get away with pretending Vince didn't own both? 

2. Trying to argue Kofi and aren't still over is a silly argument to try and make. Your grasping at straws. Fact is his Mania run will be more remembered than Naito's run to gold. 

3. Me and you both know the last 6 years wasn't all apart of the plan. He rolled with the flow because he's a good booker. But no shit like Jay White and all the rest weren't apart of his grand planning to crown Naito. 

4. No conjecture is you trying to argue in favor of a system that has no evidence of it working. You can point to literally 0 promotions as prove of what you're arguing for can work. Not one even semisuccesful promotion have you pointed out as an example of "see people don't want wrestling for random reasons, they want wrestling over sports based merit". 

You not liking outlandish stories doesn't negate the fact that wrestling has been more successful under that model than it has under one trying harder to be more sport. Just because you're a stickler for shit like "well why are they fighting if they aren't working towards a championship" doesn't mean the majority of fans feel that way.


----------



## A PG Attitude (Nov 5, 2012)

Do some of you not have jobs to go to?


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

A PG Attitude said:


> Do some of you not have jobs to go to?


You know how many people multitask between work and bull shit while on the clock.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

The Sting-Hogan story is the greatest character arc in wrestling history, marred by one shit show of an ending. It had very clear progressions with each action having a consequence on not only Sting and Hogan, but every character in the universe.

It was all perfectly enhanced by having the greatest wrestler in Hogan (in terms of attracting eyes) playing the perfect heel in doing the promos and acting the coward. In Sting, you had one of, if not the greatest wrestlers at saying more with a single facial expression than most will in a lifetime of mic work.

That shit was so goddamn good. Fuck all involved for dropping the ball on the payoff, though. Which I’ll go to my grave believing was on Hogan.


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

DOTL said:


> Why watch wrestling for cheesy drama? Why not watch Real Housewives or Maury.


The cheesy drama is what made wrestling famous to begin with.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

Rozzop said:


> The cheesy drama is what made wrestling famous to begin with.


Exactly Wrestling with out the drama is so less entertaining. It would be like defocusing the plot in Kung Fu films lol


----------



## shandcraig (Mar 23, 2008)

People are delusional if they think wwe is failing because of vince, the guy has no choice. Its failing because its a publicly traded company. Wwe was at its peak before it went public,years lately its direction jas been widely dictated outside of the few heads running things


----------



## Rozzop (Aug 26, 2019)

RapShepard said:


> Exactly Wrestling with out the drama is so less entertaining. It would be like defocusing the plot in Kung Fu films lol


You can have drama and a ranking system but lets say a crime boss kidnaps Bruce Lees daughter. 

During the course of the film we constantly get updates on how many mafia members Lee has killed. Hour through the movie, Lee has killed 12 mafia members. A graphic comes on screen telling us.

Later on Lee gets shot in the leg, has to go to hospital. Graphic lingers on the screen it is now 18-1 to Lee. 

End of the film shows Lee rescuing his daughter from a mansion owned by the crime boss. A big deal is made that the score is now 21-1 to Lee and the crime boss has killed 19 and been injured twice during the past year. 

So its 21-1 for Lee and 19-2 to crime boss. 

What an interesting showdown lol. 

Would these constant updates make the audience care any more if he rescues his daughter or not? 

Doubtful. In fact I now dont care if he rescues his daughter or not I am more bothered about the fact that the crime boss got injured twice in the last year.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> Pot Kettle Black.
> 
> Dude. It's a word. Nobody cares except for you.
> 
> ...


I don’t use the word “nuanced.” Swing and a miss.

You are honestly the most tiring person on these boards. You talk and talk and never fucking listen. And you act like you’ve got a point when you’ve got nothing.

Yes, we do know what people want. We have ratings, buys, attendance, and fucking history to show that. Not everybody is shooting from the hip blind like you are. They are capable of taking in information and letting it influence their thoughts:

Your ideas for stories fucking suck. Caring about the numbers? No one wants to do that. Fuck off. They want to care about the issues. If you make a number the issue then the number is the story. It. Doesn’t. Work. Fuck. You.

This doesn’t require a ten-point reply. I regret every shredding you that hard, because now you just won’t fucking stop. I don’t care if you said “even throw in a beer truck.” The beer truck at least captures imaginations. Your sterile as fuck ideas are redundant and obscure the most direct path to tension and conflict. That is why they are bad ideas, and the more you double-down on them the more delusional you have to go with this “WWF has never done a good storyline,” “opinions can’t be wrong” crap.



bdon said:


> Anyone who defends WWE refusing to grow the business can fuck off. If you love pro wrestling, then it is a solemn duty to root for the growth of the business, its promotions, and its stars. WWE going out of its way to prevent major stars from growing too popular, as a way to prevent a competitor being created overnight, is a big part of the problem today.
> 
> Fuck Vince McMahon. And fuck anyone that has no issue with what he has done for nearly the last 2 decades. Fucking prick can rot in hell for all I care.


WWE has grown _their_ business just fine. It’s more profitable than ever. And AEW only exists in the shadow of WWE as a counterpoint to it. There’s no way this takes off with the McMahonopoly. But AEW have wasted their shot and handed Vince more control. So I’m angry at them too.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

bdon said:


> Anyone who defends WWE refusing to grow the business can fuck off. If you love pro wrestling, then it is a solemn duty to root for the growth of the business, its promotions, and its stars. WWE going out of its way to prevent major stars from growing too popular, as a way to prevent a competitor being created overnight, is a big part of the problem today.
> 
> Fuck Vince McMahon. And fuck anyone that has no issue with what he has done for nearly the last 2 decades. Fucking prick can rot in hell for all I care.


This is such a goofy ass stance and the last sentence is just ridiculous. It's not their job to do anything, but focus on their business. What really should be the focus is why the fuck no promotion has found any sort of recipe to come close to competing with them in 2 decades.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I was so optimistic about AEW starting up. With WWE being stretched so far, they _can't_ make people care about all their content. They just can't. They've got seven hours of streamline programming every week. Wrestling fans with lives _can't_ commit to that. 

Having a two-hour slot of priority programming that doesn't insult your intelligence should have been a MAJOR fucking concern to Vince and WWE. That's why they offered Omega and The Bucks so much money. If The Elite don't sign with this thing, it's perception is rinky-dink from the start. When the TV rights fees are negotiated, WWE lose a lot of leverage if a show doing comparable ratings is asking for about half the money. You can basically neuter Vince and the WWE's billions by low-balling the offers he's getting. If Tony Khan set the price of AEW programming at $50 million per hour/per year, then Vince McMahon is suddenly starring at half his profits being slashed. What does that do to the stock? Suddenly Tony looks like he's the player and Vince has to start fucking trying again. 

But that's not going to happen. How naive I was. Their first match out the gate was a Casino Battle Royal for a World Title shot featuring Glacier freezing people. Fuck's sake. This was snake-bit from the start, just like the deal with Hogan in WCW. 

All you need to fuck WWE is a lot of capital and a decent two-hour program that doesn't insult your fucking audience. It's not as hard as people make it out to be. WWE and Vince McMahon are not untouchable -- especially with how tenuous their profits are at the moment. They need TV to be successful. Their house show business has crumbled. Without TV money, they are on the ropes. Tony Khan is not going to take that fight to them, obviously. I just hope another billionaire takes it up in a few years when some big contracts are coming up again.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> . . .


I'm not quoting any of your crap because it isn't worth the minor stress on my CPU to replicate.

You know what's wrong with you? You take the fact that a person might have different opinions than you as a personal attack. It's the only thing that can explain your hostile way of posting. That's the sign that your're either narcissistic or really young. 

Well guess what. I don't agree with you. Deal with it. Now excuse me. I'm going to talk to @RapShepard. He disagrees with me hard, but isn't a douche about it.

Kick rocks, The Weed. 




RapShepard said:


> 1. It's not their job to do anything for the industry as a whole. The suggestion that they should've kept WCW running on to create the illusion of competition is silly when it's known that TNN/Spike TV wouldn't let him run wrestling content on another TV network
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1. But it kinda is. McMahon particularly had many times to work as an ambassador for the industry. If WWE had no responsibility to that, why would anyone ask him anything concern the industry as a whole? It doesn't make sense. 

Let's say that McMahon could do anything with WCW. Did he have to fully absorb it into his company and essentially bury the brand every chance he got, even years later upon Stings appearance? If the deal is true, he could have waited those five years and relaunch WCW as a separate brand. How come WCW didn't even get the ECW treatment? I don't care if Vince had a deal to run WCW, he would have run it into the ground, on purpose, which is what he always does for things he didn't create. Every wrestling promotion apart from WWE, past and present had some working relationship with at least one other. And you want me to believe that the largest one can't?

And for a guy who's trying to sell me on the virtues of wrestling not needing to be a serious storytelling medium, do you think they can't just ignore Vince's shoot ownership of WCW like they do everything else?

But all of this is besides the point. The numbers prove that WWE hasn't done a dang thing to help wrestling. Or even itself for that matter.

2.Strawman again. I never said Kofi wasn't over. I said his heat is the same tpye of heat as before his storyline. The crowd has moved on, even if you haven't. That exactly what WWE creative wanted if his gigantic L is any indication. And once again, exposure isn't a sign of quality. That's a really bad argument. Of course a WWE"storyline" will be more remembered. More people saw it. That doesn't mean the content is better suited to a large audience.

3.If this is your attempt at trying to paint Gedo as a McMahon style booker, you aren't convincing me. Being able to improvise along a long term plan and coming up with something on a week by week basis are two different things. Things you can tell by just watch both shows. I read enough weekly serials to know when a guy is just messing around and when he has some long term vision. You can't fake it. And wasn't Jay White a Young Lion? That means he was with the company long before they used him in main stories. 

4. More strawman. I said that such a system isn't something that should be abandoned because of its potential. You're the ones saying what will or won't happen. (Remember all this started when I argued against someone's point that the system needed to be removed.) I pointed to the G1 climax as an example of something similar to a ranking system working, but you won't accept it as an example because you're leveraging minor differences to discredit it, though it busts the universal claim YOU make on almost all points. I never presumed to speak on what people want. I spoke on what I thought would be a potentially popular thing if AEW creative committed to seeing it done right. The very fact you have to misrepresent my argument up and down means you haven't taken the time to at least understand it before making an argument against it. 

I think I've been exposed to your argument enough to finally understand why it doesn't set well with me. This is what I think is the issue:

You assume that there's only one path to success. That because somethings were successful, that negates all other approaches. This is bad logic and flies in the face of how things work in the real world. And to show you why you're wrong, let's look at examples. TNA and late WCW had more outlandish stories than anyone. Didn't draw. NJPW is a sports centered show. Becoming more popular all the time. And no, most everything in the AE didn't work. 

In reality, things are successful for different reasons. The Lana story is the Jerry Springerest of the modern WWE stories, hasn't brought a huge amount of new business.

The problem with your line of thinking is clear when you remember that if 19th century college american rugby players patterned themselves after past success, the game of Football would have never seen the light of day.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Rozzop said:


> The cheesy drama is what made wrestling famous to begin with.


I'd say over-the-top characters did that. For most casual fans I'd say they couldn't tell you the details of a wrestling story if you asked.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> I'm not quoting any of your crap because it isn't worth the minor stress on my CPU to replicate.
> 
> You know what's wrong with you? You take the fact that a person might have different opinions than you as a personal attack. It's the only thing that can explain your hostile way of posting. That's the sign that your're either narcissistic or really young.
> 
> ...


Coward! You're such a coward! Not quoting me! Coward! 

You actually did quote me then deleted what I said? That's actually more effort, but okay. 

You know what's wrong with you? You project. Hard. You say I take things as a personal attack, but look at you getting riled up. You say that I'm hostile. Look at you getting hostile. You want to talk narcissistic, look at the way you post. You need to resort to ad hominem because you've got no argument.

I don't care if you disagree with me. I'm just explaining to you (like everyone else is), why you're wrong. And you are wrong. There is evidence to suggest it, and there is common sense. Your ideas are misguided and underdeveloped. You can cry about it being "hostile" or me feeling aggrieved. You'd be making it up, but you can do it. I think it's pretty transparent you just don't like being owned though.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

The Wood said:


> Coward! You're such a coward! Not quoting me! Coward!
> 
> You actually did quote me then deleted what I said? That's actually more effort, but okay.
> 
> ...


Dude. I've argued with you back and forth, writing novels. You present your arguments, which I'm happy to discus. I respected them enough to waste part of my life to take them seriously. but then you bitch and moan about how boring I am and damn near curse me out just for having a point you find disagreeable.

So, screw it.

If this was about "feeling owned" then explain why I'm okay with talking to @RapShepard. He is literally arguing the same stuff you are with the added bonus of a better personality. And unless you think you got some brilliant insight he doesn't, then just grace someone else with the sunshine that is your company. He'll pick up where you left off.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> I'm not quoting any of your crap because it isn't worth the minor stress on my CPU to replicate.
> 
> You know what's wrong with you? You take the fact that a person might have different opinions than you as a personal attack. It's the only thing that can explain your hostile way of posting. That's the sign that your're either narcissistic or really young.
> 
> ...


1. It's just not their job, for me this creating a non-sense issue to attack them with. It's not their job to worry about how their actions affect the competition. 

The WCW part is ridiculous, once proven wrong about him not wanting or considering keeping WCW seperate, you just go "oh well he would've fucked it up anyway because I don't like him". If you believe that what was your initial "oh he should've kept WCW seperate to give the illusion of competition" comment made for? That whole thing just comes off you being determined to talk shit even after being proven dead wrong. 

I'm not against working relationships, but if WWE doesn't want to have working relationships (even though they do work with other promotions in a different capacity) they don't have to. 

2. It's no strawman it's just shooting down your absurd notion a few posts ago that no good stories are told in WWE and that something Kofi's mania run will be remembered much more than Naito's run whether you like it or not. 

While popular certainly doesn't equal good that point has little relevance here. Kofi's run to main has the benefit of being one of the most loved storylines of the year, in the biggest company, and happening at the biggest event of the year. So you a couple posts ago pretending it's forgotten is just ridiculous.

3. I'm not saying Gedo is a bad booker. I'm saying you can't praise him for being able to book on the fly, but then try to down play when Vince does to great success. Whether Vince intended to or not he's ultimately the one who gave the go ahead on Becky, Bryan, and Kofi. So trying to dismiss because you don't want to give him credit is hypocritical or either haterish. 

4. What potential though? You're saying it has potential but have no real way of proving it or backing it up. Your closest example is a self contained tournament. That's very different than a year round presence. Even with you counting up the matches and going "hey you could stretch it out to 2 matches a week" is irrelevant because

A. That has never been done. 

B. It ignores the record keeping and shit that has to be done with the other matches that aren't in the tournament or whatever season format. Unless you're suggesting that there's only 2 matches a show, which I know you're not suggesting. 

5. I'm simply saying there's no proof that this thing could be popular. Could other methods work sure. But until what you're talking about actually works I'm more inclined to belief its not something people want in wrestling. 

As far as WCW and TNA. I feel like this about wrestling. The majority of people no longer have any interest whatsoever in wrestling. But for the folks that will check I believe they want it to at least be for lack of better words zany. Which is why something like the Lana Lashley stuff has been some of the most popular shit in wrestling as of late and the numbers back that up.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

DOTL said:


> Dude. I've argued with you back and forth, writing novels. You present your arguments, which I'm happy to discus. I respected them enough to waste part of my life to take them seriously. but then you bitch and moan about how boring I am and damn near curse me out just for having a point you find disagreeable.
> 
> So, screw it.
> 
> If this was about "feeling owned" then explain why I'm okay with talking to @RapShepard. He is literally arguing the same stuff you are with the added bonus of a better personality. And unless you think you got some brilliant insight he doesn't, then just grace someone else with the sunshine that is your company. He'll pick up where you left off.


Because you just regurgitate the same nonsense. I get sick of typing the exact same sticking points. I see Rap is doing the same now. I keep seeing the first line is something like "It's not WWE's responsibility." He has to repeat himself just like I do. 

Novels =/= good or insightful.

You're still okay talking to me. You're still doing it. You get mad when I don't tag you. You are using that as leverage to try and attack my personality because I got frustrated repeating the same points against your shifting goalposts: 

Wrestling works better when there are personal issues. Rankings and win-loss records are not as inherently exciting. Adding both can very often dilute. Don't do that yourself as a booker. It is stupid. That's all there is to it. The kung fu movie analogy was a great one. You keep trying to argue around that, but it's that fucking simple.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

DOTL said:


> You literally do what you're complaining about within the length of two sentences, and let me explain how by refactoring your sentence with an opinion you don't agree with.
> 
> "*But you thinking there were  not any great story lines is just flat out wrong as well. *"
> 
> ...


You simply can't judge wrestling stories against stories in movies. They aren't the same thing. If you were a fan of wrestling you would know that wrestlers tell a story in the ring. The story Buddy Murphy and Aleister Black told when inside the ring at the last PPV was incredible. It was a battle. What they are doing in a year doesn't matter because that story was told. The WWE are still telling the Daniel Bryan/Miz story after a few years and it will probably culminate in a Wrestlemania match and then reset. That's just how wrestling works. Each wrestler tells various stories throughout a year, throughout a show. I would like to see these things matter more to their characters like they actually used to. Granted, their stories haven't been great for a few years but Mankind's chase for the title is one of the best things to ever happen in wrestling. That's a story.

And AEW aren't doing any better, which is supposed to be the point of this thread. They're not telling stories well and they expect all of their stories to be told in the ring and its boring the shit out of so many fans.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

DOTL said:


> I'm not quoting any of your crap because it isn't worth the minor stress on my CPU to replicate.
> 
> You know what's wrong with you? You take the fact that a person might have different opinions than you as a personal attack. It's the only thing that can explain your hostile way of posting. That's the sign that your're either narcissistic or really young.
> 
> ...


Fuck all of this. WCW played dirty to try and destroy WWF and Vince won. WCW would have done the same thing had they won too.


----------



## kingfrass44 (Sep 19, 2019)

Cult03 said:


> Fuck all of this. WCW played dirty to try and destroy WWF and Vince won. WCW would have done the same thing had they won too.


WCW would have done the did not same thing had they won too 
WCW no played dirty
only WWF played dirty
wwe fanboys


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

Cult03 said:


> You simply can't judge wrestling stories against stories in movies. They aren't the same thing. If you were a fan of wrestling you would know that wrestlers tell a story in the ring. The story Buddy Murphy and Aleister Black told when inside the ring at the last PPV was incredible. It was a battle. What they are doing in a year doesn't matter because that story was told. The WWE are still telling the Daniel Bryan/Miz story after a few years and it will probably culminate in a Wrestlemania match and then reset. That's just how wrestling works. Each wrestler tells various stories throughout a year, throughout a show. I would like to see these things matter more to their characters like they actually used to. Granted, their stories haven't been great for a few years but Mankind's chase for the title is one of the best things to ever happen in wrestling. That's a story.
> 
> And AEW aren't doing any better, which is supposed to be the point of this thread. They're not telling stories well and they expect all of their stories to be told in the ring and its boring the shit out of so many fans.


Miz/Bryan is quote good. I will give you that.

Anyway, I do think you can tell a story using the same techniques as any other thing. 

You won't get any argument from me about AEW needing to improve.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. ....


1. Their job or not, wrestling wilted on their watch. When you have a near monopoly, they, whether you like it or not have the biggest effect on their industry. This is why people scrutinize Hollywood's practices, the actions of the big 5 publishers, and the networks. The only people who have a bigger effect on an industry are the viewers, who WWE lost in droves.

And let me clarify, I don't think Vince would have screwed up WCW because I don't like him. I don't like him because he screwed up WCW. Just look at the invasion angle. I was there. He could have protected WCW's brand, but didn't because he didn't want to get those acts over to do the thing right. I'm not making this crap up. This is the same guy who buries his own acts because they didn't get over how he wanted.So what do you think happens to things he didn't create? It's why Sting became the first legend to enter the WWE to do the job.

My point about WCW is I don't expect he'd manage it in good faith. I think that because he hasn't been a good steward with what he did use, except maybe Goldberg. Maybe he did try to buy WCW as a separate thing, but he didn't.

2. A strawman is exactly what it was. I never said Kofi wasn't over. I said his heat hasn't changed from his typical New Day heat. There is no indication that people think of him differently than before the EC storyline. This suggests to me that people have already moved on from "KofiMania." That was because WWE's mismanagement and complete neglect of his legacy.

And what you say about what people remember remains to be seen. I keep seeing this logic crop up. You guys make absolutes statements about things no one is qualified to know without any data, but then accuse the holder of the opposite opinion of doing the same thing. And I'll be honest, I made similar statements, so I won't hit to hard on this point. But I always try to qualify with the fact that I speculating and could be dead wrong.

All I can say on this point is time will tell.

3. I don't think you think Gedo is a bad booker. I do think you think McMahon is on par with him. I'm not giving Vince credit because he didn't just fall into Becky and Bryan. He literally booked against them. Inserting Charlotte into the women's match and doing all he could to book around Bryan. Vince doesn't get credit for that. Gedo, on the other hand, saw something wasn't working and attacked it from a different angle. Vince rarely does that, if at all. If that sounds haterish,then so be it. I've been watching wrestling for a long time and didn't get this way by accident.

4. Now you want to speak to what does and doesn't have potential? This is this all or nothing thinking I've been talking about. You're holding me to a standard you yourself refuse to recognize. You're saying it can't work and can't can't because it's never been done before. But how can you know unless it has been done? It's impossible to tell unless they actually try it.

About the other matches. They can have another tour for those, if they wish to. They'd just have to be clear that they are separate things.

5. Good thing I just want them to try it. I'm not so dogmatic as to say keep doing it even if it fails. I just want to see an attempt.

I need someone to do a study on why wrestling is less popular. My guess is that the biggest promotions assume the AE wasn't lightning in a bottle. I wouldn't oversell the Lana stuff. Ratings didn't rise because of the wedding. It just dropped less than normal. I don't know. Maybe you're right. If so, then such a product isn't for me an I'd be content with a less popular promotion.


----------



## Cult03 (Oct 31, 2016)

kingfrass44 said:


> WCW would have done the did not same thing had they won too
> WCW no played dirty
> only WWF played dirty
> wwe fanboys


Yeah man, spoiling what was happening on the WWF show was definitely not playing dirty. My point is they both played dirty, but one of them was always going to killed off when the other won.

You WWE haters are actually just ridiculous. Only WWF played dirty? How are people wrong so often? Wouldn't it just be safer to not type anything so we all don't see how stupid you can be?


----------



## Iron Punk (Oct 24, 2013)

Predictable generic storylines.


----------



## RapShepard (Jun 20, 2014)

DOTL said:


> 1. Their job or not, wrestling wilted on their watch. When you have a near monopoly, they, whether you like it or not have the biggest effect on their industry. This is why people scrutinize Hollywood's practices, the actions of the big 5 publishers, and the networks. The only people who have a bigger effect on an industry are the viewers, who WWE lost in droves.
> 
> And let me clarify, I don't think Vince would have screwed up WCW because I don't like him. I don't like him because he screwed up WCW. Just look at the invasion angle. I was there. He could have protected WCW's brand, but didn't because he didn't want to get those acts over to do the thing right. I'm not making this crap up. This is the same guy who buries his own acts because they didn't get over how he wanted.So what do you think happens to things he didn't create? It's why Sting became the first legend to enter the WWE to do the job.
> 
> ...


1. WWE lost viewers and continue to because the fascination with wrestling is dying down. While WWE's own product is the number 1 reason to blame for why those fans leave I think the fact no other promotion is producing what causal fans would consider compelling is also part of the industry problem. Like 

2. No it's not when the entire argument over this is considered. You're the one who tried to make a point about people not really caring or remembering Kofi's moment or that he wasn't still a top face. 

3. Again I call bull Bryan was a triple crown champion before the Yes movement. He was a big part of the show with Team Hell No and even after the first stage of the Authority feud. This is a bad problem hardcore fans have of trying to rewrite history. Bryan was a made guy before the Yes movement. Becky was a champion and top face and woman in the division before SummerSlam 2018. 

If you're going to criticize Vince for having a Becky it Bryan in a top 3 position instead of the number 1 position, then you also need to criticize Gedo for having white hot Omega and white hot Naito lose at back to back Wrestle Kingdoms. 

Be unbiased for a second. Could you imagine the outrage Vince would've got in the same situation. Not going with the white hot person just to get someone already solidified like Okada?


4. I'm simply going with what I deem the most logical assumption. I think sometimes fans like us get to caught up in what hardcore fans look at and pay attention to and forgot what it's like to be just a normal fan. This is on all aspects of hardcore fandom be it the "hey let's be serious" or "no it needs no to be a muscled out male soap opera". I just don't envision the average casual wrestling fan giving 2 shits about such a comprehensive system. 

5. I think wrestling is less popular because the fad was over. It's not because of MMA which is generally seen as the wrestling killer, because wrestling is way more popular than MMA. I think wrestling like the extreme sports craze of the late 90s just kind of went back to being niche. 


But while I vehemently disagree with you I enjoy the fact you're willing to go real in depth with your points.


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

Both played dirty. WCW didn't need to go out of business when it did. They were incompetent and that only intensified once they were getting their ass handed to them. Lots of money-gulping panic moves and relying on old stars that weren't drawing anymore. It was probably always going to happen once you put Bischoff in charge and he decided that it was going to be the Hogan promotion.


----------



## DOTL (Jan 3, 2012)

RapShepard said:


> 1. WWE lost viewers and continue to because the fascination with wrestling is dying down. While WWE's own product is the number 1 reason to blame for why those fans leave I think the fact no other promotion is producing what causal fans would consider compelling is also part of the industry problem. Like
> 
> 2. No it's not when the entire argument over this is considered. You're the one who tried to make a point about people not really caring or remembering Kofi's moment or that he wasn't still a top face.
> 
> ...





1. It's much harder for a brand to become a dominant force when AEW is the only show to get on a good station since TNA. No one is willing to take a chance on wrestling because, frankly, no one has shown much quality. 

2. I didn't even say he wasn't a top face. New Day is very over. But his storyline wasn't transformative for his heat, and I bet if you could ask McMahon, he'd tell you, if he were honest, that was by design. McMahon doesn't squash a champ unless he wants to push him back down.

3. The original point I made isn't that Bryan and Becky were never booked to win or look good. The point I made is that their best stories were accidents and almost completely meta-fictional.Becky's rise coincided with her supposed heel turn. Bryan's after a squash in Miami(?). In both those instances, a push wasn't in the books, and they booked those stories with as much resistance as possible.

BTW, losing in NJ is totally different than losing in WWE. Most of the time, guys lose very strong on that show, which is clear when the guys you mention stayed in the top of the card and the loss is worked into the story. Tanahashi tapped out, for crying out loud. Imagine Cena doing that. That's because they understand delayed gratification. 

If you lose in WWE you're almost certain to be demoted to high mid-carder, if you're lucky, and nothing substantial is written for you. That's because the top is always occupied by two people. The Face of the company and the guy on the top of the heel carousel.

4.There's a logical fallacy called an appeal to tradition. When you say that something is true because it's the way it has always been done, you commit this fallacy. Just because there was a certain level of success telling stories the way you suggest doesn't mean a) it's the only way to be successful, or b) that it's the best way. 

Wrestling existed for years before it exploded. But it had always been popular. Even so, having new things added to it to increase it's reach. From the shortening of hours long matches, to the introduction of promos and character, to making moves flashier and adding kayfabe rules. 

I'm sure there was always a person from the older generation thinking they knew the best way to go about business based on past success. There was always someone there to prove them wrong. 

I'm not saying I'm right. I'm just saying we haven't gotten to the point to write off anything just yet. 

And I'll say it again. The system isn't for the fan's benefit. It serves as a scaffold for the character's motivation and provides context for the story. Not every wrestling show has to be about beer trucks. Just look at AEW now. It's biggest missteps has been adding WWE style nonsense. 

5. Maybe. I think it's less popular because nothing is done to protect kayfabe anymore. One thing that really made the 90s special was, as crazy as it was, wrestling still blurred lines between reality and fiction. 

Thanks. I try to respect everyone's points,even if I don't agree. I don't think I'd spend this much time on it if I didn't.


----------



## Undertaker23RKO (Jun 11, 2011)

Women's Division still sucks
They use the same people on TV every week
Cutters, super-kicks, tope suicidas and Canadian destroyers get spammed every match
They lean really hard on Mox/Jericho/Cody to make shows good

They have started giving the women some stories but they aren't that talented a group of performers yet. They need to use guys like Janela, Sabian, Spears, Havoc, etc. on TV more. I don't want to see Kenny/Hangman tag together every week, Cody/MJF/Jericho being the only people allowed to cut a promo, and Best Friends on TV every single week. Have a little more variety. That's where NXT shines. Speaking of variety, everyone having the same big spots in matches is so unnecessary. Thank god guys like Cody, Mox and Jericho understand how to have a match that stands out.


----------



## bdon (Nov 12, 2019)

Undertaker23RKO said:


> Women's Division still sucks
> They use the same people on TV every week
> Cutters, super-kicks, tope suicidas and Canadian destroyers get spammed every match
> They lean really hard on Mox/Jericho/Cody to make shows good
> ...


----------



## JJKING13 (Jan 11, 2020)

I do not believe they have done any thing wrong. That said they can certainly improve. they have made mistakes which can be corrected. The biggest thing I take issue with was Cody saying he would never challenge for the title again if he didn’t defeat Jericho. Then, they go and have what I thought was a great match (loved the booked ending). To me, this was just totally unnecessary. And, I believe contrived unnecessary mistakes are the biggest mist one can make. At the end of the day, what was the purpose of the stipulation and in what way does it further the interests of AEW. I think they dropped the ball on this. Having said all of that I guess this is one thing they have done “wrongly .”


----------



## HBK Styles Ospreay (Jan 15, 2020)

DOTL said:


> There are no stars in that division except Awesome Kong,


Kong hasnt been a star for like a decade!


----------



## The Wood (Nov 7, 2003)

I think it's more she can present herself like a star. She's got poise and presence and that atmosphere changes when she walks into a room. Well, ideally. She's been very flat in AEW. That's probably a combination of injuries and booking.


----------



## dolphin1989 (Jan 7, 2020)

I don't think it's extreme enough, was Pac and Allen a good match yeah? I liked it, although let's look at Raw's main event , I really like those extreme no DQ matches, and the more people generally the better. ( sometimes) Allen and Pac was a snooze fest compared to Raw's main event in my opinion.

As far as story lines , I really think things are just too congested and a second show would be a huge benefit.

I also think it's about time they have a steel cage match, those are almost always a good time.

The women's division I think would greatly benefit from a second show and contrary to popular opinion, I actually think the women's division is going very well.


Basically in a nutshell, more story lines, more character development, and more extreme matches.


----------



## Grumpy old fan (Jan 17, 2020)

I’m a fan of AEW,I like, mostly,what there doing,but certain stuff has just started to grate with me theses past few episodes.
I’m struggling with Marco Stunt.I think wrestling should at least be based on some sort of reality, and an aggressive 14 year old sized wrestler up against 6 footers is just pushing that concept too far for me.
MJF-too much like the Miz for my liking,he’s almost a carbon copy and I find that very cringy indeed.

What winds you guys up and how do they fix it?


----------



## Optikk is All Elite (Sep 5, 2007)

MJF is nothing like the Miz in his early days at all. You can compare their arrogance, but then that could be saying that the Rock was like Miz as well.

The Young Bucks were irritating me but they've stopped being featured so prominently so i'm happy now.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

I like to think there are already SO MANY threads with people complaining about what you said, OP. And, considering you joined less than an hour ago I can only imagine you're a rejoiner blowing off steam. 

I did not like the reffing at first. But, the past few weeks have been better and I'm glad they fixed it. 

I am not a fan of the 2 entrances. It's rather minor, and I see people love it, do I don't care enough to take it away as some people love it. 

I am missing the mic time for everyone else. Cody, Jericho, Moxley, Brandi, MJF.... I want more people to get a chance to speak. shorten the some longer matches to allow promos.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass (Dec 21, 2010)

Grumpy old fan said:


> I’m a fan of AEW,I like, mostly,what there doing,but certain stuff has just started to grate with me theses past few episodes.
> I’m struggling with Marco Stunt.I think wrestling should at least be based on some sort of reality, and an aggressive 14 year old sized wrestler up against 6 footers is just pushing that concept too far for me.
> MJF-too much like the Miz for my liking,he’s almost a carbon copy and I find that very cringy indeed.
> 
> What winds you guys up and how do they fix it?


New to the forum, huh? Welcome, welcome....

this has been discussed numerous times, but I understand that since you’re new you wouldn’t know about it  ?

so, my take on it is:

1. Marko. He has two protectors in Luchasaurus / Jungle boy and when he wrestles, he does it in an evade and ‘whole body’ style. Similar to Darby. When someone throws a punch, he throws his whole body. Its like getting hit with bags of dog food from all sides. That is why it works. He won’t be bodyslamming anybody any time soon.

add to that his twitter followers has been picking up and the crowd is super hot for him - he is a keeper.

2. MJF is Miz-like, but there are a lot of differences. Miz is a narcissist, MJF is a psychopath devoid of all emotion and societal behavioural context. He thinks he’s the hero of the story. Its depeer than Miz character. His back story through the indies is that he actually stole his parents fortune and got them locked up for fraud. He is a habitual Liar and has a pretty big god complex.

hope you enjoy the forum.... even though I’m guessing you’ve been here before 

edit> oh... and I’m not a fan of the sound guy. He/she/they are fucking up too much.


----------



## The Dude (Jan 1, 2020)

-Long periods of the show where there is just match after match with no sizzle in between 

-Slopped together tag matches jus thrown out there for no reason. And really, the lack of storytelling and character development in the tag division in general.

-Matches having no meaning..... although they’re getting better. I’m pretty sure every match next week on the cruise has some kind of backstory or reason for happening so that’s good.

-Lack if episodic television. Episodic means stories and characters progress every week. Its annoying when you showcase a guy like Darby or Jungle Boy in a meaningful angle one week and then they’re forgotten about. I get they only have 2 hours (and that will change with the additional show) but I maintain that if they cut down on some of the match times for meaningless matches, they could correct this.

-Excalibur


----------



## umagamanc (Jul 24, 2018)

*Technical and audio issues:* I know it's live television, so there's always going to be mistakes. However, for a television programme that wants to be professional, I feel that there's too many in each episode.
*Women's division:* I have been patiently waiting for it to improve. It started showing signs of doing so, yet it's since derailed with the central focus being placed on the Nightmare Collective.
*Lack of focus on championships:* Since Riho became Women's Champion and SCU became the Tag Team Champions, they haven't featured regularly on Dynamite nor have they had proper feuds. They've really been poor choices as inaugural champions. The sooner their reigns end, the better it will be for those divisions.
*Lack of psychology:* This is only amongst _some_ talent, e.g. Private Party. There's too much focus on acrobatics rather than storytelling in matches. That's why Cody vs. Jericho worked so well - there was a story being told in the match.

These aren't major critiques. These are improvements I'd like to be made, so that the product can improve overall, as well as deepening the roster with higher quality talent.


----------



## Jazminator (Jan 9, 2018)

There is nothing that grates on me. Marko, Orange Cassidy, MJF, Young Bucks, Brandi, Omega, etc., etc. I like it all.


----------



## TerraRising (Aug 5, 2015)

Not having Cody be a heel authority figure is quite damning of them. FFS the guy looks like a younger, wrestling equivalent of notable typecast bad guy actor Neal McDonough. He, and not Jericho, should have Jack Swagger as his bodyguard. His wife is essentially a black Stephanie McMahon with Kong as her muscle that helps put the women's division in their place. Together, they can be a more efficient heel stable than The Authority. How is that not incentive enough for them?


----------

