The W
Views: 100727720
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.11.14 1050
The W - Guest Columns - The Fine Art of Feuding
This thread has 9 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(865 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (9 total)
dfallan
Cotechino








Since: 11.1.02
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Since last post: 4386 days
Last activity: 4385 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on
I agree with Tanya's article, and then some.

For the longest time, PPVs have geemed less and less interesting, not because of who was involved, but beacuse of WHY they were involved.

The Rock and Mankind/Foley (After Survivor 98 when Rock went Corporate) went back and forth and feuded for Months on end, with Pride, a bit of revenge and that all important Title Belt on the line. To keep the matches interesting they would add different gimmicks, but the Feud itself was great because it was built to last.

Now a days, with PPVs 4 or 5 weeks apart we seem to be getting instant feuds, and there isn't enough time to really get into it so that the fans care. Even the Micheals/Triple H feud feels too forced. (Much like Edge coming back from a "Broken arm" in like 3 weeks) The WWE is looking for quick pay offs and not taking the time to nurture

One of the great feuds in my memory was the 86 Steamboat vs Savage. Started in November (Or dec) when Steamboat had a shot, then was brutally injured. Did the Dragon Come back a week or two later? No, it took months (Nobody sold like Steamboat.)and finally in march, we got a Wrestlemania match that was overshadowed by only The Main Event (Hogan vs Andre) which was also well built up.

The best way might be to have small or "Feudless" matces at most Smaller PPVs, with larger Feuds/stories looming in the background, to be settled at your SUmmerslams, or Wrstlemanias.

The only exception (as of late) has been the Brock Lesnar setup which smells of the old days of Hulkamania. Then, the formula was clear (Not to mention used a WHOLE lot)And it seems to be the same now. Bring in a new monster of a man, have him destroy opponents and cut a path of destruction all the way to a title shot. Typically it would be the Champion who is then percieved as the underdog, and then Heroically overcomes to retain his belt.
This is great drama since a hero can only seem truly heroic if he is fighting insurmountable odds. The only problems are
1) Once the "Unstoppable" Monster is in fact Stopped, where does he go from there? (Kamala, Killer Kahn, Vader, King Kong Bundy, Zeus (although the less said about his, the better))
2) As was done for hogan, as one monster was about to be dispatched a new one had to be on his way up (or the typical "Buddy o' hulk goes bad story gets tossed in to kill time)
3) If overused, then you get a little Tired of the Champ always overcoming. Not to mention that each monster has to seem that much more menacing as the last so that you can say "The Champ has never faced an opponent like this"

Currently Lesnar is tough, Yet NOT completely Unstoppable (Heyman has helped a few wrestlers save a little face).
And so far they are looking at a great payoff from the match since they haven't given it away for free yet.

So to sum up, timing is very important for good feuds that draw fans in.



"Money's the Same whether you earn it or scam it" Bobby "The Brain" Heenan
"Will you stop!" Gorilla Monsoon after just about everything Heenean says.
"Welcome to Monday NYQUIL, where the Big boys Play with each other": Steve Austin, in ECW imitating his former boss Eric Bischoff.
Promote this thread!
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3438 days
Last activity: 3218 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
I couldn't make sense of it.





These commercials are superfine because they pay for the production costs of putting CHRIS MOTHERFUCKING BENOIT on my GODDAMN TV SCREEN! I will GO GREYHOUND! I am thinking OUTSIDE THE BUN! Dean Rasmussen 8/1/2002 Smackdown Workrate Report
dfallan
Cotechino








Since: 11.1.02
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Since last post: 4386 days
Last activity: 4385 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on

    Originally posted by evilwaldo
    I couldn't make sense of it.




Opps sorry, guess that's the price of working on a post during breaks at work (It got kinda convoluted)

My point was that Feuds start The week after one PPV and are settled at the next PPV (A whole month later) and then pretty much forgotten. This is too short an interval for truly remarkable engrossing storylines.
Once upon a time, feuds were carried for months, now they are not. (With a few exceptions) and that is a reason why a lot fans feel less interested in what's going on. At least that's my Opinon.

Tanya nd her friend felt that the main reason was that the feuds didn't seem to have proper motivation (I believe), and I agree with that as well.

Again sorry if I rambled before.



"Money's the Same whether you earn it or scam it" Bobby "The Brain" Heenan
"Will you stop!" Gorilla Monsoon after just about everything Heenean says.
"Welcome to Monday NYQUIL, where the Big boys Play with each other": Steve Austin, in ECW imitating his former boss Eric Bischoff.
skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2439 days
Last activity: 2439 days
#4 Posted on
I can agree with the main point, but not with the examples given in the column.

"Hardyz and E/C, Hardys and Dudleys were great feuds"

NO!

These feuds had little story behind them. The first story was that both teams were trying to get the managerial services of Terri Runnels. In fact neither team wanted her as their manager. The real reason is that they were two young talented teams, nothing more.

The second also had no story. They were just fighting for the sake of fighting. Engaging in oneupsmenship to see who was more extreme putting each other threw tables. They were great match-ups only because of the in ring action.

The Chyna/Jericho feud was also real stupid in that after he broke her finger with a hammer, he was turned face and they were best friends soon after that.

The main feud at this Summerslam, Brock vs. Rock has been very well done. I cant find anything to complain about in this case. I dont think the feuds of 3 years ago were anybetter done. For better drawn out feuds you have to go back 10-15 years.





-Brian Popkin
DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2265 days
Last activity: 1131 days
#5 Posted on

    Originally posted by skorpio17
    I can agree with the main point, but not with the examples given in the column.

    "Hardyz and E/C, Hardys and Dudleys were great feuds"

    NO!

    These feuds had little story behind them. The first story was that both teams were trying to get the managerial services of Terri Runnels. In fact neither team wanted her as their manager. The real reason is that they were two young talented teams, nothing more.

    The second also had no story. They were just fighting for the sake of fighting. Engaging in oneupsmenship to see who was more extreme putting each other threw tables. They were great match-ups only because of the in ring action.

    The Chyna/Jericho feud was also real stupid in that after he broke her finger with a hammer, he was turned face and they were best friends soon after that.

    The main feud at this Summerslam, Brock vs. Rock has been very well done. I cant find anything to complain about in this case. I dont think the feuds of 3 years ago were anybetter done. For better drawn out feuds you have to go back 10-15 years.




Going back 10-15 years won't prove anything because TV was only once per week then. Now, there are four shows each week and, therefore, more time to kill between PPV match-ups. You can't go 24 hours each month with two angry guys at all points on the card just talking about fighting each other without ever touching each other and totally expect people to tune in. That would be comparing apples to oranges in a sense. The Rock-Brock build has been good in that they are the only two on the SummerSlam card that have had minimal contact and that should build excitement to see them go 20-25 minutes.

I admit that the Terri Invitational Tournament was a stupid way to feud (let's fight over a skeleton with dual airbags!! YEAH!!), but it got them TV exposure and once the thing went 3 way with the Dudleyz, it was one of the better kinds of feuds--one that was for the belts and for pride. They didn't fight for the sake of fighting, they fought to be champions and to be the best, most entertainig team of them all.

Rock-HHH was a great example and has been a money feud for a long time. Real life dislike simmering below the surface of a feud can equal such great energy at times. HHH-Foley was another good feud. That 2000 run was just awesome.

You had Rock, HHH, and Foley, et.al. in and out of the Championship scene; Benoit, Angle, and Jericho feuding over submissions and the IC belt; and some great tag action. What was not to like?



Move Along. There's Nothing to See Here.

...And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 10 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on

    Originally posted by DrOp
    You can't go 24 hours each month with two angry guys at all points on the card just talking about fighting each other without ever touching each other and totally expect people to tune in.
Why not? I think you underestimate the ability of a good booker!



©CRZ™
Visit [slash] wrestling
DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2265 days
Last activity: 1131 days
#7 Posted on
Were it that I could be as optimistic as you. Actually, they almost did it with Brock and Rock (and if I skip SD! I could *pretend* that they made it) and I would actually LOVE for them to do it and make it compelling. I don't really hold out much hope of that based on the ongoing booking tendencies and today's instant gratification fan culture.

But I guess I *would* prefer well-booked no-contact over various combinations of 6-, 8- and 10-man tag teams on an ongoing basis.



Move Along. There's Nothing to See Here.

...And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
hardygrrl
Tocino








Since: 20.5.02
From: chicago burbs

Since last post: 3371 days
Last activity: 2820 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on

    DrOp said
    But I guess I *would* prefer well-booked no-contact over various combinations of 6-, 8- and 10-man tag teams on an ongoing basis


Same here, that's why I wrote what I wrote.


dfallan
Cotechino








Since: 11.1.02
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Since last post: 4386 days
Last activity: 4385 days
AIM:  
#9 Posted on

    Originally posted by hardygrrl

      DrOp said
      But I guess I *would* prefer well-booked no-contact over various combinations of 6-, 8- and 10-man tag teams on an ongoing basis


    Same here, that's why I wrote what I wrote.





My god, if they actually eliminated this, then what would they do with all the extra time...

Might we end up seeing (dare I say it...)

WRESTLING?



"Money's the Same whether you earn it or scam it" Bobby "The Brain" Heenan
"Will you stop!" Gorilla Monsoon after just about everything Heenean says.
"Welcome to Monday NYQUIL, where the Big boys Play with each other": Steve Austin, in ECW imitating his former boss Eric Bischoff.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: Line On
Next thread: Seadawg
Previous thread: A Cure for the Common Fan
(865 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Welcome, everyone, to another EXCLUSIVE, JAM-PACKED edition of Inside The Ropes. I'm Canadian Bulldog, the number one wrestling writer in the world, according to a new list published by Someone.
- CANADIAN BULLDOG, Inside The Ropes - Don't Cross The Boss (2004)
The W - Guest Columns - The Fine Art of FeudingRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.081 seconds.