BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

PWG, EVOLVE, AAW, WWN, etc
User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 12th, '18, 17:01

PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2 (4/21/2018)- Reseda, CA


TREVOR LEE vs. “FLASH” MORGAN WEBSTER- 6/10
Lee jumped Flash from behind during his intro. He then cut a promo similar to his promo last night in which he vowed to become PWG World Champion by the end of PWG’s last show in Reseda. After that this was a fine little babyface vs. heel match with some good Lucha in the beginning and cool finish.

ROBBIE EAGLES vs. JOEY JANELA- 6/10
It’s a Joey Janela match: lots of flips and big spots and kick-outs, but low on psychology

SAMMY GUEVARA vs. TAIJI ISHIMORI- 6/10
More flipping without much story. Guevara is scary athletic. Guevara got great heat, and cut a great post-match promo saying he didn’t need to be disrespected like this and thus he won’t come back to PWG unless he is given a shot at the world title.

PWG WORLD TAG TEAM TITLE MATCH: The Rascalz (Zachary Wentz & Dezmond Xavier)(c) vs. Violence Unlimited (Tyler Bateman & Brody King)- 7/10
Violence Unlimited getting a title shot after losing last night is odd to me, when a win would have really helped establish them as a threat, and Thatcher was perfectly expendable to take the fall. The match was a great, fast-paced tag team match.

REY HORUS vs. BANDIDO- 7/10
Lots of flipping, but pretty much everything they did targeted the head so there was some story there, and you can’t possibly say that they didn’t finish at the peak because that finish was nuts.

MATT RIDDLE vs. TIMOTHY THATCHER- 8/10
This was your WRESTLING encounter for the evening. It was awesome.

PWG WORLD TITLE MATCH: Keith Lee(c) vs. Jonah Rock vs. WALTER- 8.5/10
The story here was three big dudes just beating the sh*t out of each other, with the added twist that everyone really just wanted to see Lee vs. WALTER, so Jonah Rock was this obnoxious interloper who had to be dealt with. It worked quite well, and they all hit each other very had and had an AWESOME match. This was basically the ultimate hoss fight.

POST-MATCH SEGMENT- great!
Lee gave his big speech and put over WALTER, but his… threat, I guess?... about not how WALTER had better show the belt the proper respect or else actually sets up an angle between the two of them that they can go to if Lee ever comes back from WWE, which I thought was kind of clever. Afterwards Sammy Guevara came out to be a jerk and demand a title shot, so WALTER obliterated him via chop, probably setting up for something on the next show, but whether it’s a title defense or Guevara trying to get revenge after WALTER’s match remains to be seen.

A very good show from PWG, but really just on the strength of the final two matches. Still, it was well worth the rather short (around an hour and three quarters) run-time, and the final two matches plus Guevara’s segments are worth seeing, so check this show out.


Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 14th, '18, 09:22

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 12th, '18, 17:01

PWG WORLD TAG TEAM TITLE MATCH: The Rascalz (Zachary Wentz & Dezmond Xavier)(c) vs. Violence Unlimited (Tyler Bateman & Brody King)- 7/10
Violence Unlimited getting a title shot after losing last night is odd to me, when a win would have really helped establish them as a threat, and Thatcher was perfectly expendable to take the fall. The match was a great, fast-paced tag team match.
not if WALTER was going to win the title, it was more important to let WALTER dominate just as Rock did too

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 14th, '18, 14:33

cero2k wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 09:22
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 12th, '18, 17:01

PWG WORLD TAG TEAM TITLE MATCH: The Rascalz (Zachary Wentz & Dezmond Xavier)(c) vs. Violence Unlimited (Tyler Bateman & Brody King)- 7/10
Violence Unlimited getting a title shot after losing last night is odd to me, when a win would have really helped establish them as a threat, and Thatcher was perfectly expendable to take the fall. The match was a great, fast-paced tag team match.
not if WALTER was going to win the title, it was more important to let WALTER dominate just as Rock did too
Then have WALTER dominate but Thatcher then get rolled up. Or just don't make this a title match.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 14th, '18, 15:13

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 14:33

Then have WALTER dominate but Thatcher then get rolled up. Or just don't make this a title match.
or just let it be a title match, start the new champs with a good defense because true champions defend against anyone anytime anyplace.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 14th, '18, 19:32

cero2k wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 15:13
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 14:33

Then have WALTER dominate but Thatcher then get rolled up. Or just don't make this a title match.
or just let it be a title match, start the new champs with a good defense because true champions defend against anyone anytime anyplace.
It's not a "good" title defense. It's a title defense. Good title defenses are one where the title shot is in someway storyline justifiable. Otherwise you're just devaluing the titles. Or if you're going to do the "we're fighting champions" angle then have it be announced as a non-title match then have the champs cut a promo insisting that the belts be on the line.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 14th, '18, 19:57

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 19:32

It's not a "good" title defense. It's a title defense. Good title defenses are one where the title shot is in someway storyline justifiable. Otherwise you're just devaluing the titles. Or if you're going to do the "we're fighting champions" angle then have it be announced as a non-title match then have the champs cut a promo insisting that the belts be on the line.
there's no storyline or angles, it's PWG, it's a good defense because VU are a pair of huge dudes. Do you think the John Cena Open Challenge devalued the title? because none of the challengers had 'wins' or any build up, yet the title rose huge.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 14th, '18, 21:42

cero2k wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 19:57
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 19:32

It's not a "good" title defense. It's a title defense. Good title defenses are one where the title shot is in someway storyline justifiable. Otherwise you're just devaluing the titles. Or if you're going to do the "we're fighting champions" angle then have it be announced as a non-title match then have the champs cut a promo insisting that the belts be on the line.
there's no storyline or angles, it's PWG, it's a good defense because VU are a pair of huge dudes. Do you think the John Cena Open Challenge devalued the title? because none of the challengers had 'wins' or any build up, yet the title rose huge.
VU are huge dudes. So what? They haven't won yet. They're losers.

The John Cena US Title Open Challenge was an on-going storyline. It didn't build to anything good because WWE stinks, but it was at least used as a way to create some excitement for who would be getting the title shot once they proved to us that 1) there could be big surprises (Owens, Zayn) and 2) that the matches would get enough time to be great. That one also didn't really devalue the title because the title didn't mean sh*t beforehand and the way they did it it focused more of a spotlight on the belt, and on Cena having high-quality matches for it. When ROH was doing their stupid "Roddy vs. The World" thing with the TV title, I did think it devalued the title.
But at least in both of those cases there was some sort of stated reason why these guys who hadn't really done anything to earn it were getting title shots. Mostly stupid reasons, yes. But at least they were reasons. The way PWG did this makes it feel like wins and losses don't matter one lick, and if there are no storylines, and wins and losses don't matter, then the belts don't matter because then what purpose to they serve?
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 18th, '18, 09:12

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 21:42

VU are huge dudes. So what? They haven't won yet. They're losers.
Big Show and Kane are huge. If Cedric Alexander beat one of them on 205Live with no build up, it be a HUGE thing, no pun intended.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 21:42
The way PWG did this makes it feel like wins and losses don't matter one lick, and if there are no storylines, and wins and losses don't matter, then the belts don't matter because then what purpose to they serve?
they don't make it feel, that IS pwg. Winning streaks matter towards one guy getting a title shot, but if a match is booked and suddenly someone ends with a title, that's a title match, champions always defend. PWG is exhibition promotion, titles are arguably meaningless except representing who the 'better' guys are at the moment and leading the shows, but that's it. Every promotion is different. Don't expect EVOLVE in PWG.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 18th, '18, 09:35

cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:12
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 21:42

VU are huge dudes. So what? They haven't won yet. They're losers.
Big Show and Kane are huge. If Cedric Alexander beat one of them on 205Live with no build up, it be a HUGE thing, no pun intended.
But Big Show and Kane have a history of success in WWE. These guys have no history of success in PWG.

cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:12
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 14th, '18, 21:42
The way PWG did this makes it feel like wins and losses don't matter one lick, and if there are no storylines, and wins and losses don't matter, then the belts don't matter because then what purpose to they serve?
they don't make it feel, that IS pwg. Winning streaks matter towards one guy getting a title shot, but if a match is booked and suddenly someone ends with a title, that's a title match, champions always defend. PWG is exhibition promotion, titles are arguably meaningless except representing who the 'better' guys are at the moment and leading the shows, but that's it. Every promotion is different. Don't expect EVOLVE in PWG.
So why have the belts if they're not going to mean anything? Why not be like Beyond Wrestling and just not have them if you're an "exhibition promotion?" They've managed to make it work. I'd even argue that Kelly Klein's winning streak was a much bigger deal in the Women of Honor division than the Women of Honor Title has been made to feel like so far in its three months of existence (and it's not being defended at the PPV, either. We're getting a random eight-woman tag including some gals from STARDOM).
I'm not expecting EVOLVE in PWG. What I am expecting is some semblance of logic, though. If a story about a guy going on a winning streak to get a title shot is supposed to matter then why don't wins and losses matter for title shots in other situations? It's inconsistent application of the rules due solely to laziness. And PWG almost always sells out instantly so it's not like having the belts on the line even affects the attendance, so why devalue the belts if you don't have to?
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 18th, '18, 11:55

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
But Big Show and Kane have a history of success in WWE. These guys have no history of success in PWG.
VU has been building a name around the west coast for a while, so in the sense of how independent companies work, they do have some momentum behind them even if the lost. After losing to Ilja and WALTER, do you not think that John Klinger debuting against Travis Banks would had been a big defense for Banks at PROGRESS? or if WALTER debuts tomorrow at ROH and gets a title shot and Castle retains, do you not think it be a big win for him? Size still matters.

Also, just having seen them the day before get in a hoss fight against WALTER and Thatcher, you can come into a match and be a big deal. Wins and Loses matter, don't get me wrong, but taking some of the top guys to the limit also does.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
So why have the belts if they're not going to mean anything? Why not be like Beyond Wrestling and just not have them if you're an "exhibition promotion?" They've managed to make it work. I'd even argue that Kelly Klein's winning streak was a much bigger deal in the Women of Honor division than the Women of Honor Title has been made to feel like so far in its three months of existence (and it's not being defended at the PPV, either. We're getting a random eight-woman tag including some gals from STARDOM).
Because PWG wasn't born on 2011, they're 15 years in a month and they used to run that promotion quite differently, and because it's an exhibition promotion, doesn't mean you can't have championships that DO matter, because in PWG champions always defend, those champions represent the promotion and what the fans want (that's what the whole Ricochet/Dustin/Lee/WALTER thing has kinda been about) and because in PWG, there are no geeks, no developmental, it's supposed to be the top of the top or otherwise you don't get to come back. that's what 'superindies' are supposed to be.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
I'm not expecting EVOLVE in PWG. What I am expecting is some semblance of logic, though. If a story about a guy going on a winning streak to get a title shot is supposed to matter then why don't wins and losses matter for title shots in other situations? It's inconsistent application of the rules due solely to laziness. And PWG almost always sells out instantly so it's not like having the belts on the line even affects the attendance, so why devalue the belts if you don't have to?
Except they only do the winning streak stories with people that make sense (Trevor Lee: Newcomer no name, Mike Bailey: Super underdog, Chuck Taylor: only known for comedy and losing). Rascalz, VU, WALTER, Keith Lee, guys that come with some following can skip that stuff. See it in NXT for instance, if you're a guy that is 'the hottest free agent in sports entertainment' vs the new random performance center debut. Owens, Ricochet, Bazsler, and ECIII got title shots straight out of the curtain; meanwhile, Danny Burch and Taynara Conti gotta scratch and push until they get one. Size and name matters.

I haven't seen anyone that would think that giving Brody F'n King a title shot would devalue a title.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 18th, '18, 12:42

cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 11:55
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
But Big Show and Kane have a history of success in WWE. These guys have no history of success in PWG.
VU has been building a name around the west coast for a while, so in the sense of how independent companies work, they do have some momentum behind them even if the lost. After losing to Ilja and WALTER, do you not think that John Klinger debuting against Travis Banks would had been a big defense for Banks at PROGRESS? or if WALTER debuts tomorrow at ROH and gets a title shot and Castle retains, do you not think it be a big win for him? Size still matters.
Considering that Klinger then went on to win the tag titles the next night I think it'd be fine, but those examples (and particularly the WALTER one) are guys who have a rep, and come from a promotion that, while it might not be as big as PROGRESS, has a long history with history in modern European wrestling, and has been the biggest promotion on the continent for most of its existence. Also, I think you can be a bit more generous with a guy coming over from a foreign promotion (even if it is a smaller promotion) due to a kind of exoticness factor, and especially if that promotion is at least considered a premier promotion in their country. It makes it feel like more of a lateral move than a vertical move, which is what working your way up from a smaller indy into a place like PWG/ROH/CZW/RevPro/EVOLVE/PROGRESS should be.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 11:55
Also, just having seen them the day before get in a hoss fight against WALTER and Thatcher, you can come into a match and be a big deal. Wins and Loses matter, don't get me wrong, but taking some of the top guys to the limit also does.
Taking top guys to the limit is important for establishing someone, but you need to actually win something in order to get a title shot. We need proof that you have a chance of winning, not just of taking the champs to their limit and then falling short.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 11:55
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
So why have the belts if they're not going to mean anything? Why not be like Beyond Wrestling and just not have them if you're an "exhibition promotion?" They've managed to make it work. I'd even argue that Kelly Klein's winning streak was a much bigger deal in the Women of Honor division than the Women of Honor Title has been made to feel like so far in its three months of existence (and it's not being defended at the PPV, either. We're getting a random eight-woman tag including some gals from STARDOM).
Because PWG wasn't born on 2011, they're 15 years in a month and they used to run that promotion quite differently, and because it's an exhibition promotion, doesn't mean you can't have championships that DO matter, because in PWG champions always defend, those champions represent the promotion and what the fans want (that's what the whole Ricochet/Dustin/Lee/WALTER thing has kinda been about) and because in PWG, there are no geeks, no developmental, it's supposed to be the top of the top or otherwise you don't get to come back. that's what 'superindies' are supposed to be.
So the fans wanted Roddy to be champion all that time they spent booing him?
This whole "top of the top" thing and the whole idea of a super-indy only makes sense if you are looking at things from a totally non-kayfabe point of view. I've always rejected the idea of ROH and IWA-MS being a "super-indy" (at least by the definition that used to be thrown around to criticize ROH in the first few years (and others, at times) because while those promotions did book a lot of the top indy names, they always tried to use them for some storyline purpose or another (ROH even did that with the NOAH guys as they got a regular crop they knew NOAH would be willing to send them on a semi-regular basis). The super-indy idea is that you're just bringing in top indy names to have ****+ matches and sell tapes, and that's what PWG has often done. But that idea of "we're bringing in guys to have "great" matches is a very non-kayfabe idea. If a guy simply putting on good matches means more to his kayfabe status in the promotion than winning, then the belt doesn't mean sh*t because it's just a prop that you're not really even using to tell stories with.
And it's frustrating because for most of the past few years, PWG has actually done a pretty good job (at least with the world title) of telling those stories. I'd almost say everything from Cole vs. Steen all the way until the Chuck Taylor victory was a relatively well-booked title reign. Even the Ricochet stuff could have been good if it had an actual effect on Chuck and he didn't just win the belt right back. PWG has done a great job of booking a promotion where there are no geeks, but simply being a non-geek should not be enough to get you a title shot. You need to be an actual winner on a regular basis.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 11:55
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 09:35
I'm not expecting EVOLVE in PWG. What I am expecting is some semblance of logic, though. If a story about a guy going on a winning streak to get a title shot is supposed to matter then why don't wins and losses matter for title shots in other situations? It's inconsistent application of the rules due solely to laziness. And PWG almost always sells out instantly so it's not like having the belts on the line even affects the attendance, so why devalue the belts if you don't have to?
Except they only do the winning streak stories with people that make sense (Trevor Lee: Newcomer no name, Mike Bailey: Super underdog, Chuck Taylor: only known for comedy and losing). Rascalz, VU, WALTER, Keith Lee, guys that come with some following can skip that stuff. See it in NXT for instance, if you're a guy that is 'the hottest free agent in sports entertainment' vs the new random performance center debut. Owens, Ricochet, Bazsler, and ECIII got title shots straight out of the curtain; meanwhile, Danny Burch and Taynara Conti gotta scratch and push until they get one. Size and name matters.

I haven't seen anyone that would think that giving Brody F'n King a title shot would devalue a title.
Winning streak stories make sense with everyone! Guys who win a lot deserve a title shot.
As for the NXT counter examples, you're missing a few key points
1. With Owens, he did actually win two matches first, and even then Regal still didn't want to give him a title shot, but only relented because Zayn insisted on it being a title shot because Owens refused to give Zayn a match if the title wasn't on the line.
2. Baszler similarly won a bunch of matches first, and also wound up getting a title shot only because she refused to fight the champion if the title wasn't on the line and Ember really wanted a match with her.
3. With both EC III and Ricochet, they gave them video packages and build that made them seem like total megastars first. This didn't happen in PWG. You can say that isn't fair because PWG doesn't have those resources or whatever, but the fact remains that they didn't do anything to make these guys look like megastars before giving them a title match.
4. While EC III and Ricochet both never won a match before being put in a title match, they at least never lost a match, either.

The issue is not giving Brody King a title shot. It's giving Brody King a title shot when he hasn't done anything in a promotion of at least similar size or stature to earn it. If PWG is supposed to be "the top of the top" then a guy coming in from a smaller, lesser promotion should start at the bottom (or at least the middle) or PWG, even if he was the champion in that smaller place.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 18th, '18, 15:03

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
So the fans wanted Roddy to be champion all that time they spent booing him?
Kinda, same with the Bucks, same with Cole. heels need to get heat every now and then and people boo those heels, but I can assure you that no one in Reseda would disagree that Roddy deserved the title and that he had a great run.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
This whole "top of the top" thing and the whole idea of a super-indy only makes sense if you are looking at things from a totally non-kayfabe point of view. I've always rejected the idea of ROH and IWA-MS being a "super-indy" (at least by the definition that used to be thrown around to criticize ROH in the first few years (and others, at times) because while those promotions did book a lot of the top indy names, they always tried to use them for some storyline purpose or another (ROH even did that with the NOAH guys as they got a regular crop they knew NOAH would be willing to send them on a semi-regular basis). The super-indy idea is that you're just bringing in top indy names to have ****+ matches and sell tapes, and that's what PWG has often done. But that idea of "we're bringing in guys to have "great" matches is a very non-kayfabe idea. If a guy simply putting on good matches means more to his kayfabe status in the promotion than winning, then the belt doesn't mean sh*t because it's just a prop that you're not really even using to tell stories with.
And it's frustrating because for most of the past few years, PWG has actually done a pretty good job (at least with the world title) of telling those stories. I'd almost say everything from Cole vs. Steen all the way until the Chuck Taylor victory was a relatively well-booked title reign. Even the Ricochet stuff could have been good if it had an actual effect on Chuck and he didn't just win the belt right back. PWG has done a great job of booking a promotion where there are no geeks, but simply being a non-geek should not be enough to get you a title shot. You need to be an actual winner on a regular basis.
then why can't you see the title as what it is in a non-kayfabe way. The prop you give to the guys the promotion is building around, the prop that promotions give to wrestlers who they consider the top of the industry/promotion/fanbase, the prop you give to wrestlers to tell your fans that THIS guy is the guy that will drive the cards and they'll be back until WWE raids them. The prop that you give to a wrestler for the commitment they've given to the promotion and you're finally acknowledging their value. Wins and Loses are still a thing in PWG, no one stays in PWG with a losing streak really, and all winning streaks get you a title shot eventually.

I rather have champions defend all the time, even when their match was booked before the won the title, than have a prop not being used to give me at least a little sense of importance to a match, because the one big problem with super indies is that you can't never be sure that the talent will be good to go by the time your next show comes up. Look at Keith Lee.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
Considering that Klinger then went on to win the tag titles the next night I think it'd be fine, but those examples (and particularly the WALTER one) are guys who have a rep, and come from a promotion that, while it might not be as big as PROGRESS, has a long history with history in modern European wrestling, and has been the biggest promotion on the continent for most of its existence. Also, I think you can be a bit more generous with a guy coming over from a foreign promotion (even if it is a smaller promotion) due to a kind of exoticness factor, and especially if that promotion is at least considered a premier promotion in their country. It makes it feel like more of a lateral move than a vertical move, which is what working your way up from a smaller indy into a place like PWG/ROH/CZW/RevPro/EVOLVE/PROGRESS should be.

Taking top guys to the limit is important for establishing someone, but you need to actually win something in order to get a title shot. We need proof that you have a chance of winning, not just of taking the champs to their limit and then falling short.

Winning streak stories make sense with everyone! Guys who win a lot deserve a title shot.
As for the NXT counter examples, you're missing a few key points
1. With Owens, he did actually win two matches first, and even then Regal still didn't want to give him a title shot, but only relented because Zayn insisted on it being a title shot because Owens refused to give Zayn a match if the title wasn't on the line.
2. Baszler similarly won a bunch of matches first, and also wound up getting a title shot only because she refused to fight the champion if the title wasn't on the line and Ember really wanted a match with her.
3. With both EC III and Ricochet, they gave them video packages and build that made them seem like total megastars first. This didn't happen in PWG. You can say that isn't fair because PWG doesn't have those resources or whatever, but the fact remains that they didn't do anything to make these guys look like megastars before giving them a title match.
4. While EC III and Ricochet both never won a match before being put in a title match, they at least never lost a match, either.

The issue is not giving Brody King a title shot. It's giving Brody King a title shot when he hasn't done anything in a promotion of at least similar size or stature to earn it. If PWG is supposed to be "the top of the top" then a guy coming in from a smaller, lesser promotion should start at the bottom (or at least the middle) or PWG, even if he was the champion in that smaller place.
This all comes down to you not knowing Brody King and Tyler Bateman before this match then, because in WWE terms, who the fuck is ECIII and Ricochet before WWE? Who the fuck is this Baszler chick to non-UFC fans? You see Brody King as coming from this lesser indy promotion, I see VU as this team that has been making noise all over the west coast finally get to PWG. King won the four way at Flat Circle and then brought it to WALTER, you heard the pop at WALTER and King fighting, people recognize Brody King on the West Coast.

and I'm not saying that winning streaks don't make sense with top guys, but they don't actually need it.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 19th, '18, 12:06

cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 15:03
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
So the fans wanted Roddy to be champion all that time they spent booing him?
Kinda, same with the Bucks, same with Cole. heels need to get heat every now and then and people boo those heels, but I can assure you that no one in Reseda would disagree that Roddy deserved the title and that he had a great run.
But if it's all non-kayfabe then why are they booing the guy?
cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 15:03
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
This whole "top of the top" thing and the whole idea of a super-indy only makes sense if you are looking at things from a totally non-kayfabe point of view. I've always rejected the idea of ROH and IWA-MS being a "super-indy" (at least by the definition that used to be thrown around to criticize ROH in the first few years (and others, at times) because while those promotions did book a lot of the top indy names, they always tried to use them for some storyline purpose or another (ROH even did that with the NOAH guys as they got a regular crop they knew NOAH would be willing to send them on a semi-regular basis). The super-indy idea is that you're just bringing in top indy names to have ****+ matches and sell tapes, and that's what PWG has often done. But that idea of "we're bringing in guys to have "great" matches is a very non-kayfabe idea. If a guy simply putting on good matches means more to his kayfabe status in the promotion than winning, then the belt doesn't mean sh*t because it's just a prop that you're not really even using to tell stories with.
And it's frustrating because for most of the past few years, PWG has actually done a pretty good job (at least with the world title) of telling those stories. I'd almost say everything from Cole vs. Steen all the way until the Chuck Taylor victory was a relatively well-booked title reign. Even the Ricochet stuff could have been good if it had an actual effect on Chuck and he didn't just win the belt right back. PWG has done a great job of booking a promotion where there are no geeks, but simply being a non-geek should not be enough to get you a title shot. You need to be an actual winner on a regular basis.
then why can't you see the title as what it is in a non-kayfabe way. The prop you give to the guys the promotion is building around, the prop that promotions give to wrestlers who they consider the top of the industry/promotion/fanbase, the prop you give to wrestlers to tell your fans that THIS guy is the guy that will drive the cards and they'll be back until WWE raids them. The prop that you give to a wrestler for the commitment they've given to the promotion and you're finally acknowledging their value. Wins and Loses are still a thing in PWG, no one stays in PWG with a losing streak really, and all winning streaks get you a title shot eventually.
How does someone "drive" the cards without storylines? Are they going to totally change direction after every show based on who gets the biggest response and who has the Match of the Night?
The way we tell the fans which wrestlers are driving the promotion forward is by pushing them via featuring them in storylines, even if that storyline is as simple as "this guy has been winning a lot and thus deserves a chance to prove that he is the best in the company by challenging for the championship." If that story isn't coming across in PWG then that's a sign of bad announcing, and is, quite frankly, inexcusable because the announcer is also the booker.
No one stays in PWG on a losing streak? Chuck Taylor.


cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 15:03
I rather have champions defend all the time, even when their match was booked before the won the title, than have a prop not being used to give me at least a little sense of importance to a match,
And that's why we have storylines. Or at the very least a sense that wins and losses have consequences for the wrestlers.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 15:03
because the one big problem with super indies is that you can't never be sure that the talent will be good to go by the time your next show comes up. Look at Keith Lee.
If you want to make sure the guy will be around for a bit then that's easy: sign him to a contract. Not an exclusive, WWE-style contract, but the sort of thing Gabe used to do when they first got on PPV that basically signed them to certain dates well in advance. WWE likes people to finish up their indy deals, so you'd know exactly how long you have the guy for and you could plan things accordingly.

cero2k wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 15:03
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
Considering that Klinger then went on to win the tag titles the next night I think it'd be fine, but those examples (and particularly the WALTER one) are guys who have a rep, and come from a promotion that, while it might not be as big as PROGRESS, has a long history with history in modern European wrestling, and has been the biggest promotion on the continent for most of its existence. Also, I think you can be a bit more generous with a guy coming over from a foreign promotion (even if it is a smaller promotion) due to a kind of exoticness factor, and especially if that promotion is at least considered a premier promotion in their country. It makes it feel like more of a lateral move than a vertical move, which is what working your way up from a smaller indy into a place like PWG/ROH/CZW/RevPro/EVOLVE/PROGRESS should be.

Taking top guys to the limit is important for establishing someone, but you need to actually win something in order to get a title shot. We need proof that you have a chance of winning, not just of taking the champs to their limit and then falling short.

Winning streak stories make sense with everyone! Guys who win a lot deserve a title shot.
As for the NXT counter examples, you're missing a few key points
1. With Owens, he did actually win two matches first, and even then Regal still didn't want to give him a title shot, but only relented because Zayn insisted on it being a title shot because Owens refused to give Zayn a match if the title wasn't on the line.
2. Baszler similarly won a bunch of matches first, and also wound up getting a title shot only because she refused to fight the champion if the title wasn't on the line and Ember really wanted a match with her.
3. With both EC III and Ricochet, they gave them video packages and build that made them seem like total megastars first. This didn't happen in PWG. You can say that isn't fair because PWG doesn't have those resources or whatever, but the fact remains that they didn't do anything to make these guys look like megastars before giving them a title match.
4. While EC III and Ricochet both never won a match before being put in a title match, they at least never lost a match, either.

The issue is not giving Brody King a title shot. It's giving Brody King a title shot when he hasn't done anything in a promotion of at least similar size or stature to earn it. If PWG is supposed to be "the top of the top" then a guy coming in from a smaller, lesser promotion should start at the bottom (or at least the middle) or PWG, even if he was the champion in that smaller place.
This all comes down to you not knowing Brody King and Tyler Bateman before this match then, because in WWE terms, who the fuck is ECIII and Ricochet before WWE? Who the fuck is this Baszler chick to non-UFC fans? You see Brody King as coming from this lesser indy promotion, I see VU as this team that has been making noise all over the west coast finally get to PWG. King won the four way at Flat Circle and then brought it to WALTER, you heard the pop at WALTER and King fighting, people recognize Brody King on the West Coast.

and I'm not saying that winning streaks don't make sense with top guys, but they don't actually need it.
You seem to be forgetting that Baszler made it to the finals of the Mae Young Classic, but the key difference with the way you are describing it is that WWE put together video packages to explain to anyone who didn't know that Rich Guy and Flip Guy and UFC Lady are big deals.

I actually am familiar with King. Not so much with Bateman. Yes, King won a four-way and people enjoyed seeing him face off with WALTER. That tells me that King is a guy to look out for in the future and that maybe we should book a King vs, WALTER singles match at some point (non-title unless he gets some wins first), but it does not make me think that King and his tag team partner deserve a tag title shot when they are 0-1 in tag team matches in PWG.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 20th, '18, 12:04

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 19th, '18, 12:06
But if it's all non-kayfabe then why are they booing the guy?
not sure what you're asking, why book him heel or like at all? To both I guess the answer is because he's great at both and fans enjoy what he brings to the show.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
How does someone "drive" the cards without storylines? Are they going to totally change direction after every show based on who gets the biggest response and who has the Match of the Night?
The way we tell the fans which wrestlers are driving the promotion forward is by pushing them via featuring them in storylines, even if that storyline is as simple as "this guy has been winning a lot and thus deserves a chance to prove that he is the best in the company by challenging for the championship." If that story isn't coming across in PWG then that's a sign of bad announcing, and is, quite frankly, inexcusable because the announcer is also the booker.
No one stays in PWG on a losing streak? Chuck Taylor.
You drive the card by building anticipation to the main event, because even in PWG where the opener is hot, you build up expectations to the main event, you build the show's anticipation on who the champion is gonna be defending against, and you don't need a story behind because in superindies, it's more about what new match up dream match up could we get. And you don't have to change direction every show because fans don't just change their opinion one show to another, those who surprise you last time, you'll be hyped to see, those who you were already hyped to see, you want to see them go further, and that's not a storyline.

Excalibur always brings this stuff up, such and such have never faced before and stuff. And i'm not saying that winning streaks don't get brought up, because they do, same as losing streaks, but you don't always need to have one to make sense of a title shot.

Excalibur is not the booker btw, Super Dragon is. And Chuck Taylor for the most part always gets some wins here and there, as Best Friends they even won DDT4, and even then, that's why a winning streak worked with him.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
If you want to make sure the guy will be around for a bit then that's easy: sign him to a contract. Not an exclusive, WWE-style contract, but the sort of thing Gabe used to do when they first got on PPV that basically signed them to certain dates well in advance. WWE likes people to finish up their indy deals, so you'd know exactly how long you have the guy for and you could plan things accordingly.
that's not how super indies work, you can't stream or make contracts because then other promotions stop letting those guys go to your promotion, this is how PWG manages to book pretty much whoever they want.


Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
You seem to be forgetting that Baszler made it to the finals of the Mae Young Classic, but the key difference with the way you are describing it is that WWE put together video packages to explain to anyone who didn't know that Rich Guy and Flip Guy and UFC Lady are big deals.

I actually am familiar with King. Not so much with Bateman. Yes, King won a four-way and people enjoyed seeing him face off with WALTER. That tells me that King is a guy to look out for in the future and that maybe we should book a King vs, WALTER singles match at some point (non-title unless he gets some wins first), but it does not make me think that King and his tag team partner deserve a tag title shot when they are 0-1 in tag team matches in PWG.
i guess we'll just differ on how we see things, I don't see it as VU not deserving a title shot, I see it as Rascalz have to overcome this first title defense

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 20th, '18, 13:28

cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 12:04
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 19th, '18, 12:06
But if it's all non-kayfabe then why are they booing the guy?
not sure what you're asking, why book him heel or like at all? To both I guess the answer is because he's great at both and fans enjoy what he brings to the show.
I guess what I'm asking is if it's supposed to be non-kayfabe then why are they booking guys like heels and why are fans reacting to certain guys as heels? That doesn't make sense if it's supposed to be not kayfabe and the guy is a great wrestler.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 12:04
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
How does someone "drive" the cards without storylines? Are they going to totally change direction after every show based on who gets the biggest response and who has the Match of the Night?
The way we tell the fans which wrestlers are driving the promotion forward is by pushing them via featuring them in storylines, even if that storyline is as simple as "this guy has been winning a lot and thus deserves a chance to prove that he is the best in the company by challenging for the championship." If that story isn't coming across in PWG then that's a sign of bad announcing, and is, quite frankly, inexcusable because the announcer is also the booker.
No one stays in PWG on a losing streak? Chuck Taylor.
You drive the card by building anticipation to the main event, because even in PWG where the opener is hot, you build up expectations to the main event, you build the show's anticipation on who the champion is gonna be defending against, and you don't need a story behind because in superindies, it's more about what new match up dream match up could we get. And you don't have to change direction every show because fans don't just change their opinion one show to another, those who surprise you last time, you'll be hyped to see, those who you were already hyped to see, you want to see them go further, and that's not a storyline.
If the rest of the card is building up the expectations then that's not the champ driving the card. If it's all about the match-ups then what makes Lee vs. WALTER vs. Rock more important than Guevara vs. Ishimori or Riddle vs. Thatcher or whatever else they might throw out there? If the answer isn't that the guys who are supposedly the best are are the ones in the title match, then the belt doesn't mean anything.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 12:04
Excalibur always brings this stuff up, such and such have never faced before and stuff. And i'm not saying that winning streaks don't get brought up, because they do, same as losing streaks, but you don't always need to have one to make sense of a title shot.
The challenger should always have some logical claim, whether it's a win over the champ (or a previous champ, or a recent pin on the current champ before he won the title) or at least a pretty good record recently, even if it's 6-2 rather than 5-0.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 12:04
Excalibur is not the booker btw, Super Dragon is. And Chuck Taylor for the most part always gets some wins here and there, as Best Friends they even won DDT4, and even then, that's why a winning streak worked with him.
Wasn't the story that Chuck hadn't won in years and was now going on this winning streak?
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
If you want to make sure the guy will be around for a bit then that's easy: sign him to a contract. Not an exclusive, WWE-style contract, but the sort of thing Gabe used to do when they first got on PPV that basically signed them to certain dates well in advance. WWE likes people to finish up their indy deals, so you'd know exactly how long you have the guy for and you could plan things accordingly.
that's not how super indies work, you can't stream or make contracts because then other promotions stop letting those guys go to your promotion, this is how PWG manages to book pretty much whoever they want. [/quote]
You can't stream is only an issue for ROH and TNA, but I'm not talking about streaming, and I'm not saying you tell people they can't work for other people. I'm saying that you get a guy you want to put the belt on to sign to appear at your next five shows or whatever instead of working one at a time.

PWG has managed to book whoever they want by staying as neutral as possible in the various iterations of the ROH vs. Gabe squabble and because the ROH guys that really wanted to work for PWG were willing to tell ROH that not being allowed to work PWG was a deal-breaker for them (and a good chunk of ROH caving on that was knowing that Gabe was out there and would have been happy to snatch them up and let them work pretty much anywhere else they wanted, which is what Gabe has always done). Asking guys to commit to more dates in advance would not hinder them in any way.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 12:04
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
You seem to be forgetting that Baszler made it to the finals of the Mae Young Classic, but the key difference with the way you are describing it is that WWE put together video packages to explain to anyone who didn't know that Rich Guy and Flip Guy and UFC Lady are big deals.

I actually am familiar with King. Not so much with Bateman. Yes, King won a four-way and people enjoyed seeing him face off with WALTER. That tells me that King is a guy to look out for in the future and that maybe we should book a King vs, WALTER singles match at some point (non-title unless he gets some wins first), but it does not make me think that King and his tag team partner deserve a tag title shot when they are 0-1 in tag team matches in PWG.
i guess we'll just differ on how we see things, I don't see it as VU not deserving a title shot, I see it as Rascalz have to overcome this first title defense
Sure. Fine.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 20th, '18, 14:02

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
I guess what I'm asking is if it's supposed to be non-kayfabe then why are they booking guys like heels and why are fans reacting to certain guys as heels? That doesn't make sense if it's supposed to be not kayfabe and the guy is a great wrestler.
everyone knows wrestling is fake, that doesn't mean we don't enjoy shitting on someone for 'acting' like a dick in the ring, and even when we boo people (like Elgin) because we don't like him as a human, we can still all appreciate the quality of wrestling and that sometimes, when they get a title, they really do deserve it. What Roddy's run, the current Trevor Lee run, the Young Bucks run, it's always 50/50 cheers.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
If the rest of the card is building up the expectations then that's not the champ driving the card. If it's all about the match-ups then what makes Lee vs. WALTER vs. Rock more important than Guevara vs. Ishimori or Riddle vs. Thatcher or whatever else they might throw out there? If the answer isn't that the guys who are supposedly the best are are the ones in the title match, then the belt doesn't mean anything.
We want to see 'our' guy acknowledged by the company with a title. Guevara vs Ishimori you want to see Ishimori's debut, Riddle vs Thatcher you want to see pure wrestling, regardless whoever wins. Main event you want to see who walks away with the title especially knowing that Lee is on his way out. All the talk in the building is not what finish makes more sense for a story, it's more as in, who do you think will win? because regardless who wins, it will make sense.

Through a lot of Daniel Bryan's chase towards WM30, there were a LOT of points that it didn't make sense storyline wise for Dragon to win the title, but we still wanted to see OUR guy acknowledged by the company by putting the title on him.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
The challenger should always have some logical claim, whether it's a win over the champ (or a previous champ, or a recent pin on the current champ before he won the title) or at least a pretty good record recently, even if it's 6-2 rather than 5-0.
Or he could be a monster which we find it hard to believe that the champion can defeat. You tell that if Strowman debuted today out of nowhere and got in Style's face you would need to see Strowman build a record to believe he is not gonna kick Styles' ass?
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
Wasn't the story that Chuck hadn't won in years and was now going on this winning streak?
doubt it. before his first title shot after the streak, Taylor hadn't lost since 2014 and that was a 3-on-3. single's wise, his last loss was BOLA14. Before that he was 50/50 as Best Friends. before that, he lost to Ricochet on 2011 and before that he defeated Kenny King, so he actually hasn't been in a losing streak at all it seems.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
You can't stream is only an issue for ROH and TNA, but I'm not talking about streaming, and I'm not saying you tell people they can't work for other people. I'm saying that you get a guy you want to put the belt on to sign to appear at your next five shows or whatever instead of working one at a time.

PWG has managed to book whoever they want by staying as neutral as possible in the various iterations of the ROH vs. Gabe squabble and because the ROH guys that really wanted to work for PWG were willing to tell ROH that not being allowed to work PWG was a deal-breaker for them (and a good chunk of ROH caving on that was knowing that Gabe was out there and would have been happy to snatch them up and let them work pretty much anywhere else they wanted, which is what Gabe has always done). Asking guys to commit to more dates in advance would not hinder them in any way.
The can't stream thing I'm sure it goes with Impact, ROH, EVOLVE, and LU, and MLW now (not sure who else has exclusive contracts). Booking wise, you can't secure someone for say 5 shows because there's still NJPW (like for the Bucks). It's not like WWE just randomly books without paying attention to other promotion's bookings. You can try to secure WALTER for the next five shows, but it's easier to work around with dates and make sure you book according to the main guys you want to book and try to get them secured with some time in advanced (like right now that BOLA is already being announced).

Neutral helps, but the real deal is that PWG doesn't stream, that's why they can book almost anyone. People keep asking why they don't stream or subscription networks blah blah, that is THE reason.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 20th, '18, 17:22

cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 14:02
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
I guess what I'm asking is if it's supposed to be non-kayfabe then why are they booking guys like heels and why are fans reacting to certain guys as heels? That doesn't make sense if it's supposed to be not kayfabe and the guy is a great wrestler.
everyone knows wrestling is fake, that doesn't mean we don't enjoy shitting on someone for 'acting' like a dick in the ring, and even when we boo people (like Elgin) because we don't like him as a human, we can still all appreciate the quality of wrestling and that sometimes, when they get a title, they really do deserve it. What Roddy's run, the current Trevor Lee run, the Young Bucks run, it's always 50/50 cheers.
Yeah, but if we're pretending it's real when the heel acts like a dick then why aren't we pretending it's real when someone needs to win matches to earn a shot at the championship? How do those two things not go hand in hand? We're either pretending it's real or we're not.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 14:02
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
If the rest of the card is building up the expectations then that's not the champ driving the card. If it's all about the match-ups then what makes Lee vs. WALTER vs. Rock more important than Guevara vs. Ishimori or Riddle vs. Thatcher or whatever else they might throw out there? If the answer isn't that the guys who are supposedly the best are are the ones in the title match, then the belt doesn't mean anything.
We want to see 'our' guy acknowledged by the company with a title. Guevara vs Ishimori you want to see Ishimori's debut, Riddle vs Thatcher you want to see pure wrestling, regardless whoever wins. Main event you want to see who walks away with the title especially knowing that Lee is on his way out. All the talk in the building is not what finish makes more sense for a story, it's more as in, who do you think will win? because regardless who wins, it will make sense.
But what's the difference between asking "who do you think will win" in Lee vs. Rock vs. WALTER and asking "who do you think will win" in Riddle vs. Thatcher? Why does Riddle vs. Thatcher being a pure wrestling match disqualify you from wondering who will win? Or, more importantly, caring who wins. If you don't care who wins the matches then no one or nothing is "driving" the card, and the title is meaningless.
What makes WALTER "our guy" all of a sudden? He's had no journey to this point. Why is it WALTER and not Thatcher or Riddle or Cobb or Fenix or Banks or Webster? It's a random feeling. WALTER isn't "our guy" in PWG any more than he is in some other random company he started working for in the past year like EVOLVE or PROGRESS.
Wrestling fans in general and on the indies in particular have developed such a cult mentality over the past few years, and it all seems to be guided not by people who care about good wrestling or storytelling or anything like that, but just purely on a desire for kitsch, randomness, and wackiness (and then there is Roman Reigns which is a separate but exacerbating issue), and I find it infuriating. What's the difference between Naito in January 2013, who got rejected by the fans, and Naito in January 2016 where he is a mega-over hero? 2016 Naito started doing a random pose and walking out on matches. How the f*ck does THAT get you over? And Bullet Club didn't get over by being great. The Young Bucks, AJ Styles, Gallows & Anderson? They were already great! So were, Scurll , Cole, and Omega before they joined them. What got Bullet Club (as babyfaces outside of Japan) was the Young Bucks turning it into an Attitude Era nostalgia act and running across the ring while doing a million crotch chops with each goofy baby-step and screaming "SUCK IT!" in as high-pitched a voice as possible. Dalton Castle didn't get over by having awesome wrestling matches or even by cutting awesome promos; he got over by being goofy and doing the same stupid comedy spots over and over and over again. And I know that's not even a PWG problem (in fact, PWG is less guilty of being an annoying crowd than almost any in wrestling), but it's this same idea of someone is suddenly "our guy" just because he had some good matches in our promotion. It's fine to like him because of that. You're supposed to like him because of that. But the idea that we all of a sudden now MUST see him win the title because of it is silly. It's barely better than WWE fans randomly chanting "YOU DESERVE IT!" at Naomi for winning a title just because she'd been in the company for a few years. She's not one of the Horsewomen or Nattie or someone who puts on great matches all the time. She's just been in the company a few years and therefore "deserves" her turn to be the fake champion.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 14:02
Through a lot of Daniel Bryan's chase towards WM30, there were a LOT of points that it didn't make sense storyline wise for Dragon to win the title, but we still wanted to see OUR guy acknowledged by the company by putting the title on him.
What didn't make sense about it?
cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 14:02
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 13:28
The challenger should always have some logical claim, whether it's a win over the champ (or a previous champ, or a recent pin on the current champ before he won the title) or at least a pretty good record recently, even if it's 6-2 rather than 5-0.
Or he could be a monster which we find it hard to believe that the champion can defeat. You tell that if Strowman debuted today out of nowhere and got in Style's face you would need to see Strowman build a record to believe he is not gonna kick Styles' ass?
I'd prefer to see him get a few wins before the title shot is announced, but I would absolutely want to see him at least beat AJ up first. You need to do something to either show me or make me think this guy can beat the champ. Just being big and getting in the champ's face is not enough. Big guys get beaten by smaller guys all the time.


cero2k wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 14:02
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 18th, '18, 12:42
You can't stream is only an issue for ROH and TNA, but I'm not talking about streaming, and I'm not saying you tell people they can't work for other people. I'm saying that you get a guy you want to put the belt on to sign to appear at your next five shows or whatever instead of working one at a time.

PWG has managed to book whoever they want by staying as neutral as possible in the various iterations of the ROH vs. Gabe squabble and because the ROH guys that really wanted to work for PWG were willing to tell ROH that not being allowed to work PWG was a deal-breaker for them (and a good chunk of ROH caving on that was knowing that Gabe was out there and would have been happy to snatch them up and let them work pretty much anywhere else they wanted, which is what Gabe has always done). Asking guys to commit to more dates in advance would not hinder them in any way.
The can't stream thing I'm sure it goes with Impact, ROH, EVOLVE, and LU, and MLW now (not sure who else has exclusive contracts). Booking wise, you can't secure someone for say 5 shows because there's still NJPW (like for the Bucks). It's not like WWE just randomly books without paying attention to other promotion's bookings. You can try to secure WALTER for the next five shows, but it's easier to work around with dates and make sure you book according to the main guys you want to book and try to get them secured with some time in advanced (like right now that BOLA is already being announced).

Neutral helps, but the real deal is that PWG doesn't stream, that's why they can book almost anyone. People keep asking why they don't stream or subscription networks blah blah, that is THE reason.
Fine, so don't stream. But it's really only NJPW-contracted talent you'd need to worry about being unwilling to commit to dates that far in advance. ROH has let guys miss shows because of prior commitments that are within what is allowed in ROH contracts (which includes PWG),and no one else pays enough for someone to be that cautious. Plus, LU and TNA take in spurts so if they need to not tape with a guy for one day they can just tape their stuff the next day (LU might even be able to use the guy the same day). EVOLVE, PROGRESS, RevPro, and wXw all have their schedules set pretty far in advance, and Gabe has always been the most understanding booker about guys already having agreed to work somewhere else for the date.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 21st, '18, 20:34

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Yeah, but if we're pretending it's real when the heel acts like a dick then why aren't we pretending it's real when someone needs to win matches to earn a shot at the championship? How do those two things not go hand in hand? We're either pretending it's real or we're not.
two completely different kayfabe things, one is reacting to what the wrestler does in the ring, the other is having to pay attention to the overall status of the company, wins and loses, who gets booked on a constant basis, all those things that PWG fans don't really give a crap about when they're inside the legion hall.

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
But what's the difference between asking "who do you think will win" in Lee vs. Rock vs. WALTER and asking "who do you think will win" in Riddle vs. Thatcher? Why does Riddle vs. Thatcher being a pure wrestling match disqualify you from wondering who will win? Or, more importantly, caring who wins. If you don't care who wins the matches then no one or nothing is "driving" the card, and the title is meaningless.
im not saying you don't ask those questions, but who wins between Riddle vs Thatcher is really irrelevant because neither take nothing home. The winner of the main event was taking a title. Is asking 'who do you think takes the title tonight?' sound like a better question? Wrestling drives the card, enjoying the matches drive the card, seeing your favorite wrestlers do their shtick drives the shows, seeing your favorite wrestlers win drives the enjoyment, not because they're getting closer to a title, but because in that moment, they got their hands raised. They're exhibition matches, not world cup qualifiers. Most people don't go into a show making sure that there are no inconsistencies in bookings and keeping tabs on win/loss records.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
What makes WALTER "our guy" all of a sudden? He's had no journey to this point. Why is it WALTER and not Thatcher or Riddle or Cobb or Fenix or Banks or Webster? It's a random feeling. WALTER isn't "our guy" in PWG any more than he is in some other random company he started working for in the past year like EVOLVE or PROGRESS.
honestly, it's hard to explain, when you're in the legion hall, WALTER is THE guy, it was Keith Lee for a while, and before him, it was Riddle more than Chucky or Ricochet, and before Riddle, it was Sabre. It's not always about a fake journey, those are for the smaller guys with winning streaks, guys like WALTER become 'our' guy because he's a great performer that everyone, corner to corner, wants to see wrestle and wants to see beat the shit out of the other guy and develops a connection with him, not because he's gaining wins or because some geek wrote a storyline about overcoming odds, it's because he gives his all to the fans and people respect him for it, because after the match you go and talk to him, and he's a great dude, and if there is someone that you want representing this promotion that you love, it's him. PWG is 100% different from EVOLVE or PROGRESS or every other promotion in the world, it's not the booking style, it's the fans and their connection to the wrestlers.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Wrestling fans in general and on the indies in particular have developed such a cult mentality over the past few years, and it all seems to be guided not by people who care about good wrestling or storytelling or anything like that, but just purely on a desire for kitsch, randomness, and wackiness (and then there is Roman Reigns which is a separate but exacerbating issue), and I find it infuriating.

What's the difference between Naito in January 2013, who got rejected by the fans, and Naito in January 2016 where he is a mega-over hero? 2016 Naito started doing a random pose and walking out on matches. How the f*ck does THAT get you over? And Bullet Club didn't get over by being great. The Young Bucks, AJ Styles, Gallows & Anderson? They were already great! So were, Scurll , Cole, and Omega before they joined them. What got Bullet Club (as babyfaces outside of Japan) was the Young Bucks turning it into an Attitude Era nostalgia act and running across the ring while doing a million crotch chops with each goofy baby-step and screaming "SUCK IT!" in as high-pitched a voice as possible. Dalton Castle didn't get over by having awesome wrestling matches or even by cutting awesome promos; he got over by being goofy and doing the same stupid comedy spots over and over and over again. And I know that's not even a PWG problem (in fact, PWG is less guilty of being an annoying crowd than almost any in wrestling), but it's this same idea of someone is suddenly "our guy" just because he had some good matches in our promotion. It's fine to like him because of that. You're supposed to like him because of that. But the idea that we all of a sudden now MUST see him win the title because of it is silly. It's barely better than WWE fans randomly chanting "YOU DESERVE IT!" at Naomi for winning a title just because she'd been in the company for a few years. She's not one of the Horsewomen or Nattie or someone who puts on great matches all the time. She's just been in the company a few years and therefore "deserves" her turn to be the fake champion.
so everyone is wrong because you don't like it? Are all fans supposed to be perfectionist that only like well written storylines and perfectly wrestled matches with zero interference? I'm sorry, but wrestling has NEVER been about that, El Santo, Hogan, Inoki, Big Daddy, The Rock, John Cena, they were never 5* machines and their stories were not always great, hell all of those probably had more bad stories than good ones, and their matches were clusterfucks. if anything else, indie fans have developed a cult mentality over the past few years that wrestling has to be 5* bouts top to bottom and that you can't enjoy your Reigns or Naomis or Cenas or Yanos or Dalton Castles if they're not wrestling like Billy Robinson and respecting the sport that Johhny Saint built for us, and this is not even about Meltzer personal preferences. We ain't all Mike Quackenbush, some people want to see 100 superkicks and flippy shit and Session Moth Martina get drunk and Toru Yano sell DVDs. Wrestling before anything else is about having fun, that's why it's fake, otherwise it be an olympic sport like gymnastics
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
What didn't make sense about it?
he wasn't always chasing the title and on the several occasions they would write him out of the title scene, they had to find ways to get him back in due to fan reactions. Dude had a bunch of loses going in.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
I'd prefer to see him get a few wins before the title shot is announced, but I would absolutely want to see him at least beat AJ up first. You need to do something to either show me or make me think this guy can beat the champ. Just being big and getting in the champ's face is not enough. Big guys get beaten by smaller guys all the time.
a personal preference, not a universal rule.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Fine, so don't stream. But it's really only NJPW-contracted talent you'd need to worry about being unwilling to commit to dates that far in advance. ROH has let guys miss shows because of prior commitments that are within what is allowed in ROH contracts (which includes PWG),and no one else pays enough for someone to be that cautious. Plus, LU and TNA take in spurts so if they need to not tape with a guy for one day they can just tape their stuff the next day (LU might even be able to use the guy the same day). EVOLVE, PROGRESS, RevPro, and wXw all have their schedules set pretty far in advance, and Gabe has always been the most understanding booker about guys already having agreed to work somewhere else for the date.
having a schedule is really different from booking everyone in advance. PWG has had pretty much the same schedule for the last 4-5 yrs with minimal change in them, so they have their schedule, probably now more that they can't rely on the Globe not having bookins. It's still not necessary to really book wrestlers so much in advance, especially because super indies are reactive to how momentum changes with wrestlers.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 21330
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12
Favorite Wrestler: Kane

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by Big Red Machine » Jun 21st, '18, 23:31

cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Yeah, but if we're pretending it's real when the heel acts like a dick then why aren't we pretending it's real when someone needs to win matches to earn a shot at the championship? How do those two things not go hand in hand? We're either pretending it's real or we're not.
two completely different kayfabe things, one is reacting to what the wrestler does in the ring, the other is having to pay attention to the overall status of the company, wins and loses, who gets booked on a constant basis, all those things that PWG fans don't really give a crap about when they're inside the legion hall.
There's no difference. A heel acts like a dick in the ring, just like guys win and lose matches in the ring.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
But what's the difference between asking "who do you think will win" in Lee vs. Rock vs. WALTER and asking "who do you think will win" in Riddle vs. Thatcher? Why does Riddle vs. Thatcher being a pure wrestling match disqualify you from wondering who will win? Or, more importantly, caring who wins. If you don't care who wins the matches then no one or nothing is "driving" the card, and the title is meaningless.
im not saying you don't ask those questions, but who wins between Riddle vs Thatcher is really irrelevant because neither take nothing home. The winner of the main event was taking a title. Is asking 'who do you think takes the title tonight?' sound like a better question? Wrestling drives the card, enjoying the matches drive the card, seeing your favorite wrestlers do their shtick drives the shows, seeing your favorite wrestlers win drives the enjoyment, not because they're getting closer to a title, but because in that moment, they got their hands raised. They're exhibition matches, not world cup qualifiers. Most people don't go into a show making sure that there are no inconsistencies in bookings and keeping tabs on win/loss records.
You said above that the title is important because the champion is the guy who drives the card. Now you're saying that everything drives the card. If the winner of Thatcher vs. Riddle is irrelevant then the title is irrelevant two because you don't earn a shot at it; you just get lucky that the booker happens to pick you when he's booking the card... which makes it no different than the way he picked Riddle to face Thatcher or any other match on the card. If there is no pretense of earning a title shot then it's no different than being booked in any other spot on the card.
It's no different than the Women of Honor Title where it doesn't mean sh*t because the people getting the title shots are totally random women who didn't do sh*t to earn it while the women's match that has felt the biggest this year was the Kelly Klein vs. Emma match in London because they're the two women who win the most often and thus they come off like the biggest stars.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
What makes WALTER "our guy" all of a sudden? He's had no journey to this point. Why is it WALTER and not Thatcher or Riddle or Cobb or Fenix or Banks or Webster? It's a random feeling. WALTER isn't "our guy" in PWG any more than he is in some other random company he started working for in the past year like EVOLVE or PROGRESS.
honestly, it's hard to explain, when you're in the legion hall, WALTER is THE guy, it was Keith Lee for a while, and before him, it was Riddle more than Chucky or Ricochet, and before Riddle, it was Sabre. It's not always about a fake journey, those are for the smaller guys with winning streaks, guys like WALTER become 'our' guy because he's a great performer that everyone, corner to corner, wants to see wrestle and wants to see beat the shit out of the other guy and develops a connection with him, not because he's gaining wins or because some geek wrote a storyline about overcoming odds, it's because he gives his all to the fans and people respect him for it, because after the match you go and talk to him, and he's a great dude, and if there is someone that you want representing this promotion that you love, it's him. PWG is 100% different from EVOLVE or PROGRESS or every other promotion in the world, it's not the booking style, it's the fans and their connection to the wrestlers.
Dude.. you just described exactly the feeling that there has been towards basically every top babyface ROH has ever had, plus Steen & Generico and the Briscoes in the tag division, plus Jimmy Jacobs during Jimmy Loves Lacey, Cabana and Punk every time they went to Chicago, Homicide every time they were in New York, a well as Banks in PROGRESS last year, Ilja and WALTER in wXw, AJ in TNA, and many, many others. PWG isn't special. It's ECW all over again but unlike ECW it has Dave putting it over.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Wrestling fans in general and on the indies in particular have developed such a cult mentality over the past few years, and it all seems to be guided not by people who care about good wrestling or storytelling or anything like that, but just purely on a desire for kitsch, randomness, and wackiness (and then there is Roman Reigns which is a separate but exacerbating issue), and I find it infuriating.

What's the difference between Naito in January 2013, who got rejected by the fans, and Naito in January 2016 where he is a mega-over hero? 2016 Naito started doing a random pose and walking out on matches. How the f*ck does THAT get you over? And Bullet Club didn't get over by being great. The Young Bucks, AJ Styles, Gallows & Anderson? They were already great! So were, Scurll , Cole, and Omega before they joined them. What got Bullet Club (as babyfaces outside of Japan) was the Young Bucks turning it into an Attitude Era nostalgia act and running across the ring while doing a million crotch chops with each goofy baby-step and screaming "SUCK IT!" in as high-pitched a voice as possible. Dalton Castle didn't get over by having awesome wrestling matches or even by cutting awesome promos; he got over by being goofy and doing the same stupid comedy spots over and over and over again. And I know that's not even a PWG problem (in fact, PWG is less guilty of being an annoying crowd than almost any in wrestling), but it's this same idea of someone is suddenly "our guy" just because he had some good matches in our promotion. It's fine to like him because of that. You're supposed to like him because of that. But the idea that we all of a sudden now MUST see him win the title because of it is silly. It's barely better than WWE fans randomly chanting "YOU DESERVE IT!" at Naomi for winning a title just because she'd been in the company for a few years. She's not one of the Horsewomen or Nattie or someone who puts on great matches all the time. She's just been in the company a few years and therefore "deserves" her turn to be the fake champion.
so everyone is wrong because you don't like it? Are all fans supposed to be perfectionist that only like well written storylines and perfectly wrestled matches with zero interference? I'm sorry, but wrestling has NEVER been about that, El Santo, Hogan, Inoki, Big Daddy, The Rock, John Cena, they were never 5* machines and their stories were not always great, hell all of those probably had more bad stories than good ones, and their matches were clusterfucks. if anything else, indie fans have developed a cult mentality over the past few years that wrestling has to be 5* bouts top to bottom and that you can't enjoy your Reigns or Naomis or Cenas or Yanos or Dalton Castles if they're not wrestling like Billy Robinson and respecting the sport that Johhny Saint built for us, and this is not even about Meltzer personal preferences. We ain't all Mike Quackenbush, some people want to see 100 superkicks and flippy shit and Session Moth Martina get drunk and Toru Yano sell DVDs. Wrestling before anything else is about having fun, that's why it's fake, otherwise it be an olympic sport like gymnastics
I'm not saying workrate and/or well-written storylines are the only things that matter. I'm saying wrestling fans seem to be changing their minds about what they like or even about certain wrestlers for reasons that appear to me to have become increasingly arbitrary (or in cases like Naito even completely contrarian). If Santo or Big Daddy started to kick dudes in the nuts for no reason or walking out on matches, they'd have gotten booed. You'd have never seen Inoki or Hogan treat their title like it a piece of trash and get cheered for it.
I'm saying that whatever people think pro wrestling is supposed to be about, whatever it is that gets people to cheer or respond positively seems to me to be changing on a dizzying basis, with no rhyme or reason behind any of the shifts, and it sometimes seems like it happens due to the whims of a few random people in the crowd, with everyone else deciding to join in because that's the thing to do.
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
What didn't make sense about it?
he wasn't always chasing the title and on the several occasions they would write him out of the title scene, they had to find ways to get him back in due to fan reactions. Dude had a bunch of loses going in.
The only time it seemed to me that he was written out was when they transitioned him away from Orton to the Wyatt feud, but once the Wyatt feud ended, he was always in the title picture. Yes, he lost to Bray and thus his inclusion in the Elimination Qualifier didn't make much sense, but his team won that match, and he did wind up beating Orton to post-facto justify his qualifying, and his only televised loss from the day after the Rumble on was at Elimination Chamber where he got screwed by Kane (and he beat Orton again to justify being added to the title match at Mania, with Hunter serving as an additional obstacle thrown in his way).
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
I'd prefer to see him get a few wins before the title shot is announced, but I would absolutely want to see him at least beat AJ up first. You need to do something to either show me or make me think this guy can beat the champ. Just being big and getting in the champ's face is not enough. Big guys get beaten by smaller guys all the time.
a personal preference, not a universal rule.
Yes, although I think for it to work someone has to be at least as big as (of not a little bigger than) the champion, or else have some other reason that they seem like someone who doesn't have to visually prove themselves to be a threat to the champ (like if they were an MMA person or doing a one-punch KO gimmick or whatever).
cero2k wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 20:34
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Fine, so don't stream. But it's really only NJPW-contracted talent you'd need to worry about being unwilling to commit to dates that far in advance. ROH has let guys miss shows because of prior commitments that are within what is allowed in ROH contracts (which includes PWG),and no one else pays enough for someone to be that cautious. Plus, LU and TNA take in spurts so if they need to not tape with a guy for one day they can just tape their stuff the next day (LU might even be able to use the guy the same day). EVOLVE, PROGRESS, RevPro, and wXw all have their schedules set pretty far in advance, and Gabe has always been the most understanding booker about guys already having agreed to work somewhere else for the date.
having a schedule is really different from booking everyone in advance. PWG has had pretty much the same schedule for the last 4-5 yrs with minimal change in them, so they have their schedule, probably now more that they can't rely on the Globe not having bookins. It's still not necessary to really book wrestlers so much in advance, especially because super indies are reactive to how momentum changes with wrestlers.
It's necessary to book them in advance if you want to ensure the guy you want to put the belt on will be around so you're not hot-potato-ing your title. And while super-indies are reactive to wrestlers' moment changing, once a guy is over to a "put the title on him" level, he's still going to be over to that level for at least four or five months unless something totally crazy like criminal charges happens.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
WWE in 2005
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
wXw 16 Carat Tournament 2016
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
ECW Guilty As Charged 1999

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 16776
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32
Favorite Wrestler: Eddie Guerrero
Location: El Paso, TX
Contact:

Re: BRM Reviews PWG All-Star Weekend 14: Night 2

Post by cero2k » Jun 22nd, '18, 16:13

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 21st, '18, 23:31
There's no difference. A heel acts like a dick in the ring, just like guys win and lose matches in the ring.
no, because by your whole argument, a win/loss only matters if it builds to something or it comes from somewhere, a win in itself in the ring means nothing if it's just there, which is indeed how a heel acts inside the ring. Hero was a dick to Liger on BOLA, was Hero a heel? did he become a heel the next show? was it all leading into him becoming a dick that day? no, he was just a heel that match and fans reacted to it and booed one of their favorites.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
You said above that the title is important because the champion is the guy who drives the card. Now you're saying that everything drives the card. If the winner of Thatcher vs. Riddle is irrelevant then the title is irrelevant two because you don't earn a shot at it; you just get lucky that the booker happens to pick you when he's booking the card... which makes it no different than the way he picked Riddle to face Thatcher or any other match on the card. If there is no pretense of earning a title shot then it's no different than being booked in any other spot on the card.
It's no different than the Women of Honor Title where it doesn't mean sh*t because the people getting the title shots are totally random women who didn't do sh*t to earn it while the women's match that has felt the biggest this year was the Kelly Klein vs. Emma match in London because they're the two women who win the most often and thus they come off like the biggest stars.

because there can only be one driver?
or you may earn a shot by putting on awesome performances on every show and getting great responses and maybe that leads to you getting a title shot one day whether you win or lose all those matches.
Kelly Klein vs Emma felt big because Emma is a former WWE wrestler and is freaking hot, that is literally the only reason. Not excusing the booking, but let's not pretend that Klein vs Emma was this awesome build up.

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Dude.. you just described exactly the feeling that there has been towards basically every top babyface ROH has ever had, plus Steen & Generico and the Briscoes in the tag division, plus Jimmy Jacobs during Jimmy Loves Lacey, Cabana and Punk every time they went to Chicago, Homicide every time they were in New York, a well as Banks in PROGRESS last year, Ilja and WALTER in wXw, AJ in TNA, and many, many others. PWG isn't special. It's ECW all over again but unlike ECW it has Dave putting it over.
Then there you go, WALTER can be our guy without a fake journey

Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
I'm not saying workrate and/or well-written storylines are the only things that matter. I'm saying wrestling fans seem to be changing their minds about what they like or even about certain wrestlers for reasons that appear to me to have become increasingly arbitrary (or in cases like Naito even completely contrarian). If Santo or Big Daddy started to kick dudes in the nuts for no reason or walking out on matches, they'd have gotten booed. You'd have never seen Inoki or Hogan treat their title like it a piece of trash and get cheered for it.
I'm saying that whatever people think pro wrestling is supposed to be about, whatever it is that gets people to cheer or respond positively seems to me to be changing on a dizzying basis, with no rhyme or reason behind any of the shifts, and it sometimes seems like it happens due to the whims of a few random people in the crowd, with everyone else deciding to join in because that's the thing to do.
Of course it's gonna change, society changes, everything changes. What you identify with in the 80s is not gonna be the same in the 90s. you'd be making the same Naito argument in the attitude era for Stone Cold, if you're not willing to change with the industry. Cena wouldn't likely get over in the attitude era, but he did in the post 9/11 years. Hogan wasn't over in the attitude era for a similar reason.

Naito, btw, (in Japanese) gave promos about why he disrespected the belt and authority and the fans, and if one can identify with those words, that's a good enough reason to cheer for him disrespecting that second had title.

I do believe the hive mind exists, especially in WWE, but it's a mindless hive mind, they don't all think Naomi deserves the title. But regardless, there's still nothing wrong if people want to cheer for shtick over perfectionism. Both limits are bad for the industry.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
Yes, although I think for it to work someone has to be at least as big as (of not a little bigger than) the champion, or else have some other reason that they seem like someone who doesn't have to visually prove themselves to be a threat to the champ (like if they were an MMA person or doing a one-punch KO gimmick or whatever).
yeah, like a big mean motherfucker in a ski mask like Brody King towering over both Rascalz. Size and look will always matter in wrestling, if even for a first impression.
Big Red Machine wrote:
Jun 20th, '18, 17:22
It's necessary to book them in advance if you want to ensure the guy you want to put the belt on will be around so you're not hot-potato-ing your title. And while super-indies are reactive to wrestlers' moment changing, once a guy is over to a "put the title on him" level, he's still going to be over to that level for at least four or five months unless something totally crazy like criminal charges happens.
Like i said, PWG knows their schedule, I know for the most part their schedule, i'm sure Super Dragon can just hit up WALTER and say, hey, don't take bookings for such and such weekend, and he's already booked, either change the weekend or book the tag champs to main event, and if everything else breaks, you book a Mystery Vortex and see who you can book last minute and still sell out in 5 minutes. I don't think you really need to book 5 shows in advanced. PROGRESS has a show every other weekend, i'm sure most common wrestlers know that and consider PROGRESS whenever taking bookings, especially the champs.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests