Originally posted by CajunManHey I liked WARGAMES when WCW did it with the 3 different rings. It wasn't that bad. I hope Vince does go with this concept.
When did they do War Games with three rings? They did the Battle Bowl thing with three rings, but I thought War Games was always just two rings?
Cajun Man is confused. He's thinking of World War 3.
Originally posted by lotjxI think it has to do more with forcing the writers to develop mid card characters into those matches. That is work and the one thing we know about WWE writers, they don't like work. Especially if the work has to do with someone who is not high on the card or a spouse. They would rather book the same four guys in the main event for almost a year straight. How hard is that?
You're making quite the assumption about who is to blame for the staleness of the upper card. The writers may have some input into who gets pushed and how, but they're not the decision makers. And given that they're traveling every week and essentially on call 24/7, it's not fair to say they don't work hard.
A WarGames PG style would be the lamest thing ever.
As much as I would like to see more War Games, a WWE War Games, with its one ring and blood stoppages, could be pretty weak indeed.
(edited by KJames199 on 11.2.10 1621) JK: LJ, FB, T
Originally posted by CajunManHey I liked WARGAMES when WCW did it with the 3 different rings. It wasn't that bad. I hope Vince does go with this concept.
When did they do War Games with three rings? They did the Battle Bowl thing with three rings, but I thought War Games was always just two rings?
If you want to be technical Battlebowl *did* have three rings. One was awarded to Vader (the winner), like a Superbowl ring.
"Tattoos are the mullets of the aughts." - Mike Naimark
If it is a sanitized, late 90's WCW version of WarGames: The Match Beyond, do not mock it's memory by bringing it back. Now, if they bring it back for 1 year in order to hit on the nostalgia to sell a WarGames: The Match Beyond DVD, maybe I can live with the degradation.
They could just do a yearly 'WCW gimmick' PPV and have War Games in the first year, Battlebowl in the second, Spin The Wheel (or, as it will surely be retitled, WWE Roulette) in the third, etc. Hopefully Judy Bagwell is still alive so they can stick her on a pole for a night of matches in 2015.
Kirk, crackers are a family food. Happy families. Maybe single people eat crackers, we don't know. Frankly, we don't want to know. It's a market we can do without.
Originally posted by lotjx...I want blood in my events. I want unbridled destruction and gore in some of these matches. I am not saying its right, but damn it, it needs to happen...
You DO KNOW that wrestling is fake, right? lol!
Seriously, for one night only, I want the return of the triple cage from READY TO RUMBLE!
Originally posted by CerebusSeriously, for one night only, I want the return of the triple cage from READY TO RUMBLE!
They used the triple cage in real life after that movie came out. I have a 20-minute video on my computer of a triple cage triple threat heavyweight title match between Jeff Jarrett, DDP, and David Arquette. STILL can't believe that happened.
Originally posted by CerebusSeriously, for one night only, I want the return of the triple cage from READY TO RUMBLE!
They used the triple cage in real life after that movie came out. I have a 20-minute video on my computer of a triple cage triple threat heavyweight title match between Jeff Jarrett, DDP, and David Arquette. STILL can't believe that happened.
It is the policy of the documentary crew to remain true observers and not interfere with its subjects. "This topic is going to suck to read in three years." -Psycho Penguin
I'm marking myself as a goofball here, but all I can think of when you talk about a War Games PPV, is how it would all be worth it if they can get Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy to guest-host the Raw before it.
On speakers: "Time to play The Game!" Matthew: "No! Let's play The Global Thermonuclear War."
"Randy, remember when you told me to tell you when you're acting rude and insensitive? You're doing it now."
Originally posted by John OrquiolaIt's been 23 years. I like nostalgia and tradition in wrestling as much as the next guy, but I think we've seen the best the Survivor Series concept has to offer. I could go for something new around Thanksgiving time.
Fair point, but does anyone actually believe that the reason Survivor Series did poorly this year had nothing to do with A/ building a super-stale main event with horribly written, unfunny comedy segments involving Triple H talking to a midget as if he were a dog and B/ UFC forcing fans to make choices about what they'd rather spend their money on. One of these things was in Vince's ability to control. I'm a firm believer when you build a show properly, people will watch it, even if you call it At Your Residence: Put Up Your Dukes.
Bragging Rights doesn't render Survivor Series redundant, because you could easily do a "Bragging Rights" match on Survivor Series every year. That show was too gimmicky, and the idea that WWE ever sold anyone on caring about RAW V.S. Smackdown, that people see them as unique brands with different identities, is laughable. It's all WWE to most fans. Doing gimmicky shows every month is not a direction I am optimistic about. HITC was about as lame and flat as you can get due to the lack of blood.
(edited by Hogan's My Dad on 12.2.10 1757) Quiet, Or Papa Spank!
I personally don't like nor do I think it is wise. I consider Survivor Series one of the "4 Cornerstone PPV's" (along with Royal Rumble, Summer Slam and of course Wrestle Mania).
The gimmick PPV's may be the new thing but I honestly think they are worse than regular PPV's. Bragging Rights for example, was pretty bad. Night of Champions wasn't bad if I remember but I guess Vince is doing it to attract new media and attention.
If Vince is trying to do what TNA does with gimmick PPV's.....why?
Originally posted by JustinShapiroMy joke was that Wrestlemania would be renamed Money in the Bank until I saw that Money in the Bank was one of the ideas for a PPV.
So let's map out the whole year.
Jan - Royal Rumble (renamed Over the Top Elimination Challenge) Feb - Elimination Chamber Mar - Wrestlemania Apr - Draft May - Extreme Rules Jun - Fatal Fourways
AHAHA FATAL FOURWAYS IS ACTUALLY GONNA HAPPEN
The new PPVs are
April: Extreme Rules May: Wild Card June: Fatal Four Way July: Money in the Bank
I'm not very happy about MITB being off Wrestlemania.
Is it offical that its out of Wrestlemania this year? That is a good match to showcase new talent like it did with Kofi, Punk and others. I wonder what match is going to replace maybe a fatal four way tag match?
It's not officially off yet, but I don't know how you'd have two guys running around with briefcase title shots at the same time.
If it's gone, that's bad for the midcarders, who had eight spots in one match to get onto the show, and bad for Wrestlemania, since it was a guaranteed great match to look forward to every year that got a lot of time and focus.
The good news is that at least they're back down to 12 PPVs per year for the first time since 2003.
Yup, Breaking Point is gone and now Night of Champions sits there. And yet I was told that Scrambles Unforgiven was going to be the new revolutionary force in sports entertainment.
August: SummerSlam September: Night of Champions October: Hell in a Cell November: Bragging Rights December: TLC
Wild Card is apparently Raw Roulette/Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal. Bragging Rights might be a Wargames match this year, according to the Observer. That show is not at all like Survivor Series.
Watching Hogan vs Warrior at WM 6 as a kid was my dream mark out match. It was amazing. But now my fav wrestlemania match would have to be Rock vs Austin WM 17