Since last post: 3392 days
Last activity: 2353 days
|#1 Posted on 2.8.02 0331.45 |
Royal Rumble winner=WrestleMania title shot
KOTR winner=Summer Slam title shot
What about the Survivor Series?
WWE should have the name of this particular PPV mean what it implies.
5 RAW vs. 5 SmackDown-Sole Survivor gets title shot at Royal Rumble. The winner wouldn't need to go through 29(or 39 if WWE makes it 40 guys-20 for each brand) guys at the Royal Rumble. The GM's could hand pick the guys or they could earn the slot somehow.
What do you think?
Don't Tread On Me,
|Promote this thread!|| |
From: Frederick, Maryland, USA
Since last post: 3986 days
Last activity: 3700 days
|AIM: || ||#2 Posted on 2.8.02 0601.02 |
|The Royal Rumble winner gets a shot at WrestleMania, so it does make sense that the Survivor Series champ gets a shot at the Royal Rumble. Last year of course they had to use the Survivor Series to end the Invasion angle, so hopefully this year your idea will pan out. Problem is what happens if there is more then one guy on the winning Survivor team?|
Weiner of the Day - 7/11/02 "Free Slurpee Day!"
Everyone seems to like you since you are funny and the life of the party.
However, take away those few gimmicks that you
crowd entertained with, and there really isn't much else left.
Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 31 min.
|#3 Posted on 2.8.02 0626.44 |
|If there's multiple survivors left from one team, then turn the match into an elimination match between the surviving team members? Say, if two people survived, then it's just a one on one match with the winner getting the shot, but if three survived then it becomes a Three Way Dance elimination match. Then you could build up uneasy alliances during the actual 5 on 5 match, perhaps with some people wanting to eliminate "favourites" from their own side to avoid having to fight them when their side won..|
Or is that just getting way too complicated?
Since last post: 3585 days
Last activity: 3553 days
|#4 Posted on 2.8.02 0702.16 |
|That would actually be pretty good. Like, for example Jericho might not want to help break up a pin on Taker due to Jericho not wanting to face Taker later. It could add intriege to the match.|
I'm gonna get me an oversized guitar, gain 40 pounds, and become the next D!
Since last post: 3753 days
Last activity: 3753 days
|#5 Posted on 2.8.02 0746.11 |
|I like the whole idea, it gives more meaning to the Raw vs. Smackdown feud.|
"Catching Hitler was neato!" "Next stop, Hirohito!"
From: Dorchester, Ontario
Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 8 hours
|#6 Posted on 2.8.02 1147.16 |
|Remember a few years ago when the Survivor Series gimmick was totally abandoned in favour of having the one-night tourney for the title? I always felt a better way of doing that would've been to have a bunch of guys randomly selected into teams of four, and then they'd square off against each other. The survivors from each match then go into a "survival match" (like at the 1990 Series) to decide the Ultimate Survivor. This combines the Survivor Series and Battlebowl formats.|
I was born in a manger, like that other guy. You know, he wore a hat?
From: Jaaaaamacia Mon, No Problem.
Since last post: 3734 days
Last activity: 3732 days
|#7 Posted on 2.8.02 1236.29 |
|I would like to see some of these booking ideas come true, and more "wrestling" does go on at PPV's. Though the amount you peeps are talking aboot won't happen, I don't see WWE ready to give away two PPV's for the price of one. If they did, we could see alot of new fueds stem from this and set automatic fueds that lead to the next Pay-Per Veiw.|
"SAL BANDINI, WANNA WRESTLE?"
Since last post: 2541 days
Last activity: 2525 days
|#8 Posted on 2.8.02 1337.35 | Instant Rating: 3.91|
|That is a good idea. Survivor Series has been lacking recently- I feel that it's the weakest of the big PPVs, and it needs to become more unique. I think each of the big PPVs needs a gimmick. I alway enjoy the Royal Rumble and King of the Ring because of the gimmick, and because the winner gets over in a unique way. Survivor series needs that, too, with a "2002 Survivor" rub or somesuch.|
Moo hoo ha ha.
Rangers lead the way
From: toronto, ontario, canada
Since last post: 4037 days
Last activity: 3491 days
|AIM: || |
|ICQ: || ||#9 Posted on 2.8.02 1508.48 |
|even though many of the matches have been atrocities, and the cards are normally easily forgotten, i've always loved the survivor series idea, and some of the matches have been downright awesome. springing to mind are the 10-team elimination match from 1988 (i haven't seen the 87 version), as well as the opener from 1996 (owen, bulldog, new rockers vs furnas, lafon, godwinns) and hell, even the first two elimination matches from 1995 (horowitz, hakushi, jannetty, bob holly vs 1-2-3 kid, skip, rad radford, tom prichard as well as lioness asuka, aja kong, bertha faye and... uh, some other broad vs alundra blayze, chaparita asari, some girl and tomoko watanabe, who may have been on the bertha team)... but the wwf has not given apt time to recent elimination matches (cmon, 7 minutes for the 1999 opener?!)...|
so what i'm thinking, is that your idea come into play. have the raw gm or whatever decide 5 people from each show, heel or face, it doesn't matter, and throw them into the match. the surviving members (if more than one) would fight it out for the shot at the belt.
the way to qualify for this match, if not being handpicked by the gm, would maybe be to have a singles match, and win, and therefore earn the spot on the card. it would make sense, could create great storylines, and could also be an excellent match if the right workers were in there.
even though i haven't made any *new* points in this message, other than the qualifying part, i'm still gonna just say that the idea rocks all ass and should happen THIS YEAR! RIGHT NOW EVEN! AHHH!
From: The Moon
Since last post: 5 hours
Last activity: 5 hours
|AIM: || ||#10 Posted on 2.8.02 1820.55 |
|I really like the battle bowl-esque idea, but i doubt it would happen because of the amount of matches it would take. And because it would have to me almost the entire ppv dedicated to that and not have any of the other titles decided. |
The 5 on 5 match for the title shot is a good idea also, and is probably more likely. And what if there are two survivors from one team? Well there's another ppv between Survivor Series and Royal Rumble to decide which one goes to Royal Rumble.
And I agree that Survivor Series has gotten weak. Personally I think KOTR took it's spot in "the big four" (Wrestlemania, Royal Rumble, and Summerslam being the other three of course.
THAT IS AWESOME!
From: Bloomington, IN
Since last post: 3466 days
Last activity: 3231 days
|#11 Posted on 3.8.02 0348.26 |
|i agree that the old Survivor Series format needs to come back. Basically, its what got me into wrestling. I kind of new who teh guys where, but i saw a WWF magazine that covered the 1989 Survivor Series (I think i was like 10 at the time) and i thought it was the neatest concept in the world.|
I mean we can see one on one or tag team matches 364 days out of the year. They can't take one day and give us elimination matches?
It seems to me like it would be a great way to start new feuds and continue ongoing fueds without anybody losing heat. I mean who is going to blame the Rock for getting pinned cleanly by say, Guererro when he was left alone to fight Guerrerro, Benoit and Jericho? No one. Rock loses no heat and Guerrerro gains a ton for pinning the Rock. Plus, it was always interesting to see how a team would work together.
How many actual Survivor Series moments have there been? I can only really think of three - the debut of Taker, Taker over Hogan and last years end of the Invasion.
But what about in 90 when Bret went through three guys just to barely lose to Dibiase (foreshadowing) or in the same event where Perfect got a clean pinfall on Texas Tornado -- who was IC champ at the time. One thing i remember from that match was when the Demolition and LOD were both DQ'd Heenan was going crazy yelling "For What?" I always thought that was kind of cool because in what other situation would Heenan (as a manager) care if the Demolition got DQ'd.
However, best SS team of all time? (Not counting last years two teams) I gotta go with the 89 Hulkamaniacs
Hogan (in his prime -- easily most over wrestler)
Jake Roberts (at his most popular)
Demolition (at their most popular)
Maybe not great from a workrate standpoint but this has to be the best as far as crowd heat goes.
From: Ottawa Ontario, by way of Walkerton
Since last post: 21 min.
Last activity: 21 min.
|ICQ: || ||#12 Posted on 3.8.02 0805.18 | Instant Rating: 7.33|
Originally posted by Big Bad
Remember a few years ago when the Survivor Series gimmick was totally abandoned in favour of having the one-night tourney for the title? I always felt a better way of doing that would've been to have a bunch of guys randomly selected into teams of four, and then they'd square off against each other. The survivors from each match then go into a "survival match" (like at the 1990 Series) to decide the Ultimate Survivor. This combines the Survivor Series and Battlebowl formats.
With the winner receiving a title shot at the Royal Rumble. Sounds like an idea.
I will not falter, I will not collapse.
With my head held high none shall pass....
Since last post: 3392 days
Last activity: 2353 days
|#13 Posted on 6.8.02 0247.20 |
Yeah, I intended to write what would happen if a team of 2,3,or 4 won, but I completely spaced and didn't remember until I had left my house for the weekend. Anyhoo, like some of you guys said, there could be a 1 on 1, three way dance, four way dance, or five way dance(which of course would never happen). This could happen at the conclusion of the match or at Armageddon. If it was saved until Armageddon, then the Survivor match would have to be followed by a title match with a decisive victor in order to send the fans attending and watching the Survivor Series PPV home happy. With WWE complaining that reality shows are stealing their viewers, this would give them a chance to strike back with an intricately booked match that could see alliances formed and destroyed.
Let's just say it comes down to Benoit,Eddie,and Angle against Booker T. The trio could be destroying Booker and with victory on the horizon, Benoit and Eddie(having formed an alliance and wanting to be the final 2 combatants) could jump Angle(fearing that he would be a threat to either of them winning) from behind and lay Booker on top of him for the 1,2,3. Benoit and Eddie could then finally put away Booker and then be able to have an equal chance at being the final Survivor.
WWE could then put over the fact that they have had the Survivor concept well before the CBS series(although that would be going against their pact with Viacom).
WWE actually had a good thing back in 95(HBK,Sid,Bulldog,Ahmed vs. Owen,Yoko,Razor,Douglas) when they had heels and faces on the same team. It makes for interesting stories to be told and adding in a title shot stipulation makes it far more intriguing.
It worked at last year's Survivor Series too, but it should be used to put over ONE Survivor for now on, not a company of survivors.
Don't Tread On Me,
From: New York City, NY
Since last post: 602 days
Last activity: 3 days
|#14 Posted on 6.8.02 0313.45 |
|Slightly off topic, but remember when the Survivor Series debuted, each team had five members. This led to the catchy tag-line "Teams of five, strive to survive" (I can almost hear Jess right now). Then they switched to four man teams, but kept the catch phrase with the appropriate alteration ("Teams of four, strive to survive"). This new tag-line had none of the flair of the original. The WWF couldn't devise some type of grappling rhyme that included the word "four"? Talk about losing your heat.|
(edited by NickBockwinkelFan on 6.8.02 0417)
"Well, you can't involve friendship with business. It has to be one or the other. It's either business or friendship, or hit the bricks!"
--Life Lessons from "The Tao of Bobby the Brain Heenan" Uncensored 2000 preview
Since last post: 4064 days
Last activity: 4009 days
|#15 Posted on 6.8.02 0344.43 |
|How about "Teams of four, easier to survive than before!"?|
or maybe, "Teams of four, leaves you wanting more!"?
or, "Teams of four, what a chore!"
Hmmm, I like the third one the best.
"And in front of the entire world, I want to show my little boy that sometimes - just sometimes, you have to FIGHT to be a man." - Michael S. Hickenbottom, the man who does not take part in angles that conflict with his religion, swearing violent revenge on HHH in full view of his two-year-old son. 11:06 PM, EST. 08/05/02.
Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 49 min.
|#16 Posted on 6.8.02 0409.04 |
|As to what to do at Survivor Series this year, I have only one word, and one word only. The only way to properly determine a number one contender for Royal Rumble.|
Think about it...
"All I ever asked for in life is an unfair advantage." Microchip, Punisher Annual #2
Since last post: 3749 days
Last activity: 3205 days
|AIM: || ||#17 Posted on 6.8.02 0709.51 |
|I really liked the old SS format with teams, maybe one or two singles-type matches.|
As a mark, I also liked the 'ultimate survivor' type match like they had at SS 91, but quickly after growing up, now I think this is too overbooked.
But bring back the old-style SSes and I'll be happy.
-Thank you, Captain Obvious!
-"I don't totally understand why I do things", Rivers Cuomo
From: New Jersey
Since last post: 2089 days
Last activity: 2089 days
|#18 Posted on 6.8.02 0800.48 |
|I'm agreed, I want to see a return to the old-school elimination style SS matches. Use the format from 1991. |
Have just one heavyweight title match. Everyone else is either on a team of four or doesn't wrestle. No IC match, to women's match, no hardcore crap. All Raw vs. Smackdown teams. Here are a few fun team suggestions:
Team Rainbow: Hardy Boyz, Booker T, Golddust.
Team Green: John Cena, Randy Orton, Batista, Brock Lesner.
Team Un-America: Test, Christian, Storm, Jericho
Team USA: Hulk Hogan, Mike Awesome, Hardcore Holly, Kidman
Since last post: 244 days
Last activity: 7 hours
|AIM: || |
|ICQ: || ||#19 Posted on 7.8.02 1717.03 |
KOTR winner=Summer Slam title shot
Really? Isn't this just some stipulation they like to drop from time to time?
1993 - Bret - no title shot
1994 - Owen - no title shot
1995 - Mabel - title shot, losing
1996 - Stone Cold - no title shot
1997 - HHH - no title shot
1998 - Ken Shamrock - no title shot
1999 - Mr. Ass - no title shot
2000 - Kurt Angle - title shot, losing
2001 - Edge - no title shot
2002 - Brock Lesnar - most likely winning the strap
You see, only three times the KotR trophy was used as the main event ticket (and Kurt would've been in without the trophy because of the love triangle). So it's just like the 24/7 rule, appearing from time to time, depending on whoever wins the thing.
I love the Survivor series idea by itself, no further stipulation added. Just have 5 on 5 (or 4 on 4) guys go at it, they should really get back to that.
"Wanting people to listen, you can't just tap them on the shoulders anymore, you gotta hit them with a sledgehammer!"
From: Huntington Beach, CA
Since last post: 995 days
Last activity: 31 days
|#20 Posted on 7.8.02 1750.54 |
|I am all for the "Sole Survivor" getting a title shot, however, this more often than not leads to a MUCH more predictable outcome. |
WWE owns the rights to WCW right? Survivor Series, as much as I liked the original 5 on 5 concept, seems to be dead. Lets have several 5 on 5 matched- a tourney even, and then throw the 4 top stars from each show into a War Games setup. The intra-team rivalry would make the match exciting- and inter-show intrigue. And that more than any other time would be a great time for a talent jump....
Chris Jericho stole my beard. That is right, I had it first.
|Pages: 1 2 Next