The W
Views: 100844842
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.11.14 1825
The W - Pro Wrestling - How many wrestlers are enough?
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(13702 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (8 total)
Punkinhed
Salami








Since: 23.1.02

Since last post: 4282 days
Last activity: 4257 days
#1 Posted on



On the WWF's website they list 84 "superstars". Obviously Vince can't keep Austin, Rock, UT, Angle and HHH. They will be split up, but how?

Then there's the "midcard", the Edges and Booker T's and Kanes? I realize this may be a bit odd, but the math seems interesting to me: how many wrestlers do you actually NEED to have a sucessful promotion? Say...4 marquee, 8 middle talents (some of whom can be moved up if need be for variety), and an unknown number of jobbers/curtain jerkers/dark/Jakked workers?



"Oh! The light! [pointing to the setting sun] Blackness comes when the light goes away!"
"Yeah, but this is getting to be a pretty regular thing."
"I don't care. It still scares the sh*t out of me."
Promote this thread!
Marx_of_Death23
Linguica








Since: 6.3.02
From: Chi Town Baby

Since last post: 4376 days
Last activity: 4373 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on
I think it all depends on how they play out the feuds. If they are all 3 week build-ups with the payoff at the PPV, 4 marquee stars would never be enough. People would be sick of the same match-ups over and over again. But if they cleverly draw out feuds as we used to see, that would be enough big names. But Vince really needs to bring back some drama in the feuds. He tried with Edge-Regal, but the matches weren't up to par, although it was nice to see some continuity. No more of this... "Gee Taker, I hated you with a passion last month, but now you're my buddy so we can take out Angle." But I'm sure this point has been argued to death.....



"Are those two the gay ones you were talking about? I mean... look at those hideous pants.." - a female friend on seeing Kurt Angle and Chris Jericho on screen
Fazzle
Kishke








Since: 2.1.02
From: Wilmington, NC

Since last post: 3611 days
Last activity: 3212 days
#3 Posted on
I'd say you really only need 30.

Explanations are for pussies, leave it at 30 :)



WTF13
Boerewors








Since: 22.1.02

Since last post: 4493 days
Last activity: 4493 days
#4 Posted on
Probably however many they had before they brought in all the people from WCW.



"No one has a beer party at Scott Hall's expense!"
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 23 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#5 Posted on
Really, hasn't the WWF gone with the same 4 or so marquee stars for the last 2-3 years already? I believe someone pointed out in a thread a while back that you have to go back to Dec. 1999 to find a WWF title match not involving Austin, Rock, HHH or Angle. And even at that card the main event was HHH vs. Vince. Outside of the very recent inclusion of Jericho into the topcard, it has mainly been a 5 man circle jerk for 3 or 4 years now between the aforementioned 4 and Undertaker.



There, I feel better now.
Parts Unknown
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Darkenwood

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 day
#6 Posted on
And Foley, though not on such a grand scale.



YOU WANT A PIECE OF ME!?! - The immortal, chilling words of...The Shockmaster!
StampedeFan23
Morcilla








Since: 12.1.02
From: BC, Canada

Since last post: 2085 days
Last activity: 1621 days
#7 Posted on
I have been obcessed with the computer game EWD lately, so I have to say about 40. I have 48 on my active roster and, to be honest, I only use about 25-30 of them in any stretch (about two weeks or so). All the rest are bouncing inbetween the Raw/Smackdown card and Heat.



Are you ready for Mahkan-mania to run wild all over you?
Qubber
Boerewors








Since: 7.1.02
From: Sheffield, UK

Since last post: 2784 days
Last activity: 2046 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.00

    Originally posted by StampedeFan23
    I have been obcessed with the computer game EWD lately, so I have to say about 40. I have 48 on my active roster and, to be honest, I only use about 25-30 of them in any stretch (about two weeks or so). All the rest are bouncing inbetween the Raw/Smackdown card and Heat.


That's really interesting. So, therefore, if they do split the roster right down the middle they'd have it about right to have a fair amount of wrestlers in rotation, with a few off TV injured or whatever.

I know it's not the same as running a real fed by any means, but that number was about the same for me when I played TNM7. There's only so many interesting things you can do with a standard 9 match card with two hours to run it in I guess.

So, yeah, anyway, if we ignore my sad wrestling RPG predeliction I say they might be successful with 40ish guys per show. Maybe this carzy split idea may lead to the crazy elevation of new guys into the main events too, you never know... .



"Nobody enjoys a good time more than I do, but this business of yours is as legitimate as a three-legged donkey...which of course is illegitimate because as we all know donkeys have four legs."

Lance Storm, 21st January 2002.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: H-B-K
Next thread: More proof that Rock v. Hogan is the real WrestleMania Main Event
Previous thread: JR = Cocktease
(13702 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Some thoughts that I'd like to see happen at the PPV (probably won't happen though), followed by my predictions on what the WWE will do. My thoughts are based on the storylines we have, as they stand today. HHH Vs.
The W - Pro Wrestling - How many wrestlers are enough?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.405 seconds.