Make matches matter

[Mr. C]

After quite a few years as a fan of professional wrestling, I’ve heard complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most matches seems to matter. It's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and SmackDown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much. Very rarely does the WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt.

An Intercontinental title match should be an adequate RAW main event, but with having so much time to fill with content these days, it really won’t happen. I know the idea is that you’re in this business to become the WWE Champion, but not everyone there is the champion. That’s lost in creative, as well as some of the wrestlers who are just pegged to become stars right out the gate. Yes, I want guys like Dolph Ziggler and Wade Barrett to get the title and have a reign, but when they’re not challenging for the title or fighting John Cena, they’re lost in the shuffle.

[#1-norm-fan]

Pretty much.

One of the main problems that I've mentioned before is how the outcomes of the matches don't serve the purpose they try to make them serve. CM Punk being pinned on Raw does not mean anything if it's happening monthly in 10 minute Raw matches. Then all of a sudden, he regains his skills to win with the title on the line at the PPV. Rinse, repeat. It's pointless.

There's no reason you can't have Punk wrestling a lower-midcard guy on Raw, squashing them on occasion, struggling a little on occasion, but ultimately winning because he is the best in the world. That "best in the word" title should be justified by him being more successful in matches than anyone else in the world... not just on PPV when the title is on the line. His world title storyline leading into PPVs can be built up via altercations not revolving around matches. It's not rocket science.

It's easy to use matches to solidify guys' placement on the card and build up to a point where you're pitting two guys together who match up well to build intrigue as to who will win. There needs to be an idea where people stand and the matches need to show that. If you want to book Punk as the best in the world, you can't have him losing regularly. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make his character seem any more impressive than your typical main eventer who also loses about as much.

Smackdown is better as far as character booking within matches. Sheamus has been beating Dolph Ziggler over and over but Dolph has taken him to the limit every time. This establishes that Sheamus is the top dog and Ziggler is the up and comer who just can't get over the hump. His wins over lesser guys than Sheamus helps to solidify the fact that he's good but not quite THAT good yet.

Del Rio vs Christian last week was good too. Del Rio is a main eventer, Christian is the champion of the upper-mid card. Christian came within an eyelash of beating him but ultimately failed. It justifies where both guys are. I'm not saying the result of those matches had to be just so. Upsets can and should happen. Just like with a legit sport, you have minor upsets and major upsets on occasion. But with every match, there should be some kind of understanding of where people stand.

That's how you make TV matches matter while also building up anticipation for PPV matches between evenly matches guys.

[tjogo]

After quite a few years as a fan of professional wrestling, I’ve heard complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most matches seems to matter. It's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and SmackDown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much. Very rarely does the WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt.

An Intercontinental title match should be an adequate RAW main event, but with having so much time to fill with content these days, it really won’t happen. I know the idea is that you’re in this business to become the WWE Champion, but not everyone there is the champion. That’s lost in creative, as well as some of the wrestlers who are just pegged to become stars right out the gate. Yes, I want guys like Dolph Ziggler and Wade Barrett to get the title and have a reign, but when they’re not challenging for the title or fighting John Cena, they’re lost in the shuffle.
I think it's like a demo now or playing an hour of a game you get the feel of it but you don't get the full thing.. i mean back then they used to show great meaningful matches ON Tv. Now all it's about is money and making that big profit on the PPVs. The WWE today doesn't understand that you can make money and still put out a great product for people to watch. Look what they are doing with the writing and how they aren't really developing all these guys that much or following up with them. Take that Sandow guy for example.

Give me rep if you guys like what I posted above. :y:

[Damndirty]

Some of their matches do matter, but most are used to treat a large percentage of the talent like shit! For instance, if you don't air somebody's theme, you already know that person is gonna lose. STUPID!

If a guy is doing good on television and drawing a good crowd, you don't keep the sunava bitch OFF of the television and make him look like a barely visible stepping stone- he's making people care if he wins or not. STUPID!

Like #1wwfchampion said, if you're holding a primary title and are considered a top face, don't make him lose half or more of his matches, that only makes it look like he shouldn't be champion or takes away the meaning of his role. STUPID!

Another thing I've noticed on the programs- when someone does become a champion, it seems like the character development stops. This is the case of both Punk and Sheamus. Matches may still be good matches, but people will lose interest in them if their characters weren't bettering, and by bettering, I mean cutting more priceless promos, making people more and more afraid of them, or doing controversial things. Make these guys champion and then say fuck it, let their characters get old? STUPID!

[Anybody Thrilla]

I agree with the original post. Could you imagine if Hulk Hogan was losing non-title matches on Superstars in the lead up to PPVs back in the day? Seems ridiculous to even think about.

I think it's all based on the shoehorn booking trying to squeeze as many PPVs into a calendar year to where they don't have time to build up contenders as viable threats. We've talked about that ad nauseam, but that's only because it's so true. When you have three weeks to build a contender as opposed to months, you have to give people a quick reason to think that the contender deserves a shot, so what better way than to have him beat the champion? It makes sense sorta, but it's not entertaining...like, at all.

[#1-norm-fan]

Yeah. It doesn't say "He beat the champion, he's got a legit shot of doing it again for the title" as much as it says "He beat the champion... big deal. Join the club."

[Damndirty]

I remember in the case of HHH during the Mcmahon/Helmsley Era, losing was a rarity for him. It took a helluvan effort for him to lose the match to somebody. He might have had more, but during that Era, he had two non-PPV losses that I am aware of- one to Chris Jericho and another to the Brooklyn Brawler.

[Anybody Thrilla]

I don't even like the contender and champion being in matches with one another in the build up to a PPV. From a kayfabe GM stand point, you shouldn't even want to be giving away your PPV main event on free TV. Seems like it would be super easy to book around, but I guess just the sheer volume of material they have to write makes it hard to be amazing all the time. Fortunately, they still strike gold every here and again.

[Anybody Thrilla]

I remember in the case of HHH during the Mcmahon/Helmsley Era, losing was a rarity for him. It took a helluvan effort for him to lose the match to somebody. He might have had more, but during that Era, he had two non-PPV losses that I am aware of- one to Chris Jericho and another to the Brooklyn Brawler.

He even had the aura about him AFTER that. Remember what a huge deal it was when Shelton Benjamin beat him on Raw?

[Damndirty]

That's cuz he is
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bEJiogGujdc/0.jpg

[#1-norm-fan]

I was just about to mention his loss to Shelton Benjamin. That was huge. And all these years later, it's still fresh in people's minds. I think it says something when you can specifically name someone's TV losses like that. Punk I can name Tensai, Jericho, Kane, Bryan... that's just because they happened in the last month or two. I'm sure there are people who had forgotten about some of those already because of how unimportant they were.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Shelton's two wins over Triple H had him poised for greatness. He kinda squandered the opportunity I guess, but at least the potential was there. It would be nice to get back to something like that.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Speaking of making things matter, the United States title should be very, very far from Santino Marella right now.

[Damndirty]

I'm still wondering why the hell it got taken away from Ryder and given to... bleck.. Swagger.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Swagger made sense as US champion. I thought he was going to have a great run and become relevant again with the reign coming to an end once Swagger proved to Vickie that he could do anything Dolph could do (incredible title run from Dolph and that title). THEN I expected the blow off match that Swagger and Ziggler just had on Raw for free in something like 6 minutes if I had to guess. Could have been PPV worthy. Everybody knew Dolph was going to win that match on Monday. Could have been way bigger. Oh well. No point in talking about that now.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Ryder's not really that awesome, btw.

[Damndirty]

It's because they won't let him be. I think he needs to be somewhat revamped, like have a new finisher and not be as much of a coward either (doesn't have to a fearless retard either, but too much is too much). The fans love him, you gotta admit that, he just needs a little work.

[Anybody Thrilla]

They let him speak, and every time he does, he sounds like a giant doofus. His mic skills are nowhere to be found. I do think he's OK in the ring, but the only "great" match I remember from him was against Christian for the ECW title a couple years or so ago.

[#1-norm-fan]

Speaking of making things matter, the United States title should be very, very far from Santino Marella right now.

I'm a huge fan of Santino but I agree that until his character is revamped to include a "Holy shit, he's goofy as fuck but he can actually beat someone's ass" factor, they need to get the title off of him.

[#1-norm-fan]

Ryder was kinda in the same boat. Difference is Santino has the ability to look credible in the ring (Just look at his style in OVW). I can't see Ryder working as a champion.

[Damndirty]

Don't get me wrong, I think Ryder is a million miles away from any hope of a primary title shot. I see potential in him, but he's not using enough of it. He needs to speak more like he does in his Youtube show.

[#1-norm-fan]

THEN I expected the blow off match that Swagger and Ziggler just had on Raw for free in something like 6 minutes if I had to guess. Could have been PPV worthy. Everybody knew Dolph was going to win that match on Monday. Could have been way bigger. Oh well. No point in talking about that now.

Yeah, that's another thing. Crazy missed opportunities. Ziggler kinda has his spells where he's not really doing anything of note (As with most of the Raw roster outside the main event). Swagger definitely hasn't had a feud in a while. Why not stretch out that natural feud between Swagger and Ziggler to a PPV and make an intriguing midcard match with a story instead of throwing on Sin Cara vs Hunico unannounced with no build? It would almost take little to no effort... which seems right up these writers' block.

I thought the same thing when John Morrison returned after R-Truth injured him. All that waiting and he makes his return to face Truth on Raw and Truth squashes him in like 5 minutes. I think that was before SummerSlam where both men were involved in an impromptu 6 man tag to start the show... as opposed to just letting that natural build that had been building for months while Morrison was out lead to a big PPV match. Again, little to no effort. But they decided to blow it on a quick TV match.

[#1-norm-fan]

It's definitely not a good sign when you aren't even using your PPVs to build up your midcard. A good reason why they're starting to realize none of the younger guys are main event ready. Because they've spent all these years not putting any effort into anything but the current main event and now they've got all these young guys who have just been drifting aimlessly for years and they're wondering why they aren't over.

[Rammsteinmad]

Give me rep if you guys like what I posted above. :y:

Did you really just say that? :lol:

[SlickyTrickyDamon]

It felt weird on the first seasons of NXT when they would track the win/loss record.

[Logan]

Give me rep if you guys like what I posted above. :y:

Tell me you did not just say that! :rofl:

[Logan]

It felt weird on the first seasons of NXT when they would track the win/loss record.

TG I never paid attention to NXT.

Also, I never understood why they seemingly all of a sudden stopped paying attention to peoples win/loss records

[#1-norm-fan]

TG I never paid attention to NXT.

Also, I never understood why they seemingly all of a sudden stopped paying attention to peoples win/loss records

If they did, it would look even more ridiculous that the champion has a pretty shitty one.

[Mr. C]

Does anyone think Cena is going to lose at Money In The Bank? I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s the one who ends Punk’s reign at SummerSlam. I’ll be more surprised if Punk wins, considering Punk went over last year at SummerSlam.

[#1-norm-fan]

Cena vs Punk would kill the progress they've made getting the fans more behind Cena. Not only because it would put him back in the title picture so they can start resenting him again but it would put him against a guy that they will be WAY more behind than him. It would be a bad idea.

[Volare]

Does anyone think Cena is going to lose at Money In The Bank? I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s the one who ends Punk’s reign at SummerSlam. I’ll be more surprised if Punk wins, considering Punk went over last year at SummerSlam.

I've been waiting for the argument of Cena cashing in on a face, without announcing it to turn him heel.

[Mr. C]

I've been waiting for the argument of Cena cashing in on a face, without announcing it to turn him heel.

Cena won't turn heel because there isn't anyone who, as a face, is good enough to oppose him.

[loopydate]

I do think Cena wins MitB, but loses his cash-in. If WWE wanted to spin that back to the "he can't win the big one" story they were telling after Mania, they could come up with much worse ways of getting there.

Or he could just no-sell the loss again and pour barbecue sauce on an announcer.

I feel like this all-former-champions match is a clever way to have someone fail cashing in without losing momentum.

[Fox]

Cena won't turn heel because there isn't anyone who, as a face, is good enough to oppose him.

Have you not been watching the program for the past year? CM Punk and Daniel Bryan are both well equipped to stand strong as opposition for a heel John Cena. Punk brings out the best in Cena - John hasn't had a single match as good as his encounters with Punk at MITB and Summerslam last year. Punk sells merchandise, he gets cheered and chanted for in every arena, and he's a good role model because no one can ever question whether he's on steroids or not. Daniel Bryan is just fucking amazing right now and his "Yes!" gimmick is so over he could turn face on a dime.

The only reasons they won't turn Cena heel is because of all the merchandise he sells, because of all the Be a Star and Make a Wish stuff he does, and because Vince McMahon and Triple H don't believe that Punk or Bryan are physically big enough to be the face of the WWE.

End rant.

[Damndirty]

Have you not been watching the program for the past year? CM Punk and Daniel Bryan are both well equipped to stand strong as opposition for a heel John Cena. Punk brings out the best in Cena - John hasn't had a single match as good as his encounters with Punk at MITB and Summerslam last year. Punk sells merchandise, he gets cheered and chanted for in every arena, and he's a good role model because no one can ever question whether he's on steroids or not. Daniel Bryan is just fucking amazing right now and his "Yes!" gimmick is so over he could turn face on a dime.

The only reasons they won't turn Cena heel is because of all the merchandise he sells, because of all the Be a Star and Make a Wish stuff he does, and because Vince McMahon and Triple H don't believe that Punk or Bryan are physically big enough to be the face of the WWE.

End rant.

I think if Cena's out of the way, Punk's popularity would triple if not more, as long as he speaks pipe bombs that earn the gasps of the audience, but still.... Ryback's coming up, so that might not happen anyways.

[Mr. C]

Having wins matter is by making more matches for the lesser titles. It would help put over the lesser titles if more guys were anxious to get a shot. Just giving Jack Swagger a United States title shot with no build and no reason doesn’t exactly make me think anyone gives a smeg. The brand split is dead; drop the World Heavyweight title. Build up the Intercontinental and United States titles and have those titles be main event matches on RAW and SmackDown. Meanwhile, keep the main angles revolving around the WWE Champion, but only give him the main event of the Pay-Per-View and two TV matches.

[Gertner]

For the last time: Cena doesn't need to turn heel. He's the PERFECT wrestler. People either LOVE him or HATE him, so he's perfect because regardless, he always draws a reaction. Pretty much anybody can go up against Cena and get over be it a face or a heel.

[Gertner]

I think if Cena's out of the way, Punk's popularity would triple if not more, as long as he speaks pipe bombs that earn the gasps of the audience, but still.... Ryback's coming up, so that might not happen anyways.

Punk's "pipebombs" get old fast

[#1-norm-fan]

I think if Cena's out of the way, Punk's popularity would triple if not more, as long as he speaks pipe bombs that earn the gasps of the audience, but still.... Ryback's coming up, so that might not happen anyways.

If you mean just the lack of Cena would cause Punk's popularity to skyrocket, I have no idea why you would think that.

If you mean Cena being out of the way would force WWE into booking Punk as "THE guy" and would therefore raise his popularity, that's probably true. No way it triples or gets nearly as huge as you think though. WWE's writers don't have the ability to book a character that well at the moment and "pipe bombs" only go so far. As it stands, Punk in his current state is not ready to be the face of the company.

[Fox]

For the last time: Cena doesn't need to turn heel. He's the PERFECT wrestler. People either LOVE him or HATE him, so he's perfect because regardless, he always draws a reaction. Pretty much anybody can go up against Cena and get over be it a face or a heel.

I don't buy that.

The same argument could have been made for Hulk Hogan in 1995/96. He was in about the same state as Cena is now: the kids still loved him and cheered for him, but the older audience booed him and didn't buy his schtick anymore. Regardless, he got "a reaction" wherever he went.

But when he turned heel he exploded. Yes, he turned off the kiddies and alienated them against him, but it was the biggest thing ever because his heel character was just so good.

Cena "works" right now because of the reasons you listed, and there's no argument that that is true. But to say that he couldn't be even bigger and a better asset to the entertainment and storyline aspect of the company as a mega heel is just unfounded. A full blown John Cena heel turn would be like an atomic bomb going off in the middle of the WWE universe. The kids would be shocked and alienated and terrified that their hero had turned evil. The adults and teens would love the fact that he had changed and become what they always thought he could become. And everyone would look to see who was going to step up and try and take down the monster that John Cena had become.

Of course, you'd need someone capable of writing that storyline and keeping it on track to make the thing really work. But a massive heel John Cena who got mega heat in every arena in the country against the TRUE babyface star of the company (see: someone who doesn't get a 50/50 reaction in every arena, but more like a 90/10 reaction), be it CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, an elevated Ryback, or whomever could be incredible in all aspects: entertainment value, good versus evil storylines, PPV buyrates and TV ratings.

I guarantee they will pull the trigger one day. Cena can't be this character forever. It's just a matter of time. My only concern is that when they do pull the trigger, will it be too late?

[Mr. C]

I guarantee they will pull the trigger one day. Cena can't be this character forever. It's just a matter of time. My only concern is that when they do pull the trigger, will it be too late?

You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Punk and Rock have both accomplished this. They don't even need to turn him heel necessarily. He can say whatever he wants within the limits, and it's worked; he's stood toe to toe with Rock. One of the things about Cena that annoys me is when he acts happy/sarcastic when a situation demands seriouness. It doesn't come across so much as cocky as that he doesn't care, and if he doesn't care, why should the audience?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Cena vs Punk would kill the progress they've made getting the fans more behind Cena. Not only because it would put him back in the title picture so they can start resenting him again but it would put him against a guy that they will be WAY more behind than him. It would be a bad idea.

I am actually really pumped for the idea of CM Punk vs. John Cena again. I always thought it should have been the main event the WWE should put forward since Extreme Rules, and I still stand by that assertion.

John Cena should win Money in the Bank at the PPV, and then CM Punk and he start their tension. Punk tells Cena that he's going to cash in just like everyone else. Cena says "I'm not like you -- I've got hustle, loyalty and respect" and all that jazz. On the 1000th edition of RAW, Punk and Bryan have a Submission Match or something like that, and in a rage, some heels attack Punk (perhaps a freshly turned Zack Ryder with Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks... more on that in a second) and Cena runs out for the save. Cena then nails Punk with his briefcase and cashes in, becoming the 11-time WWE Champion.

This really sets the build for Cena vs. Punk at SummerSlam into motion. Punk would actually have a moral case against Cena, who has not turned heel, but has shown himself to be human and capable of going against what he preaches sometimes. Punk would then beat Cena at SummerSlam, and the win would make Punk look amazing. You can even have Cena hand Punk the WWE Title back as a symbolic "passing of the torch." Not that Cena is going anywhere, but in the sense that Punk can now call himself the "Face of the WWE." Of course, Cena and Punk can continue their rivalry, perhaps with Punk poking the bear that is Cena. You could easily carry it right though until Survivor Series, where Team Punk could face Team Cena in the main event.

As for that Zack Ryder heel turn I mentioned -- people are right when they talk about Ryder not really being able to carry the ball yet. He's over, but he's been lacking something lately. What really endears Zack Ryder to people is the self-made charm his "I really want to make it" character has. And yeah, Ryder is over. But imagine how much a heel turn would really wrench at people. Imagine if Ryder's ambition was rotated, and instead of making cheap YouTube videos, he motivated some of his fellow "mistreated" peers and led them as part of a "Revolution" against the current WWE landscape.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar could possibly be made to mean even more by having control of the WWE on the line. If Triple H wins, he remains in control of the WWE; if Brock Lesnar wins, Paul Heyman takes over as Chief Operating Officer of WWE.

[Mr. C]

I’d like to see more characters, as opposed to heroes and villains. A character can’t hang his hat on wanting to be champion forever, especially if that character has been champion multiple times in the past.

[dingdongyo]

But when he turned heel he exploded. Yes, he turned off the kiddies and alienated them against him, but it was the biggest thing ever because his heel character was just so good.

an argument against this is kids are the vast majority of the audience. they drop millions of dollars on this guy as a hero. could a turn pay off? if every adult that welcomed it bought 10 bad guy cena shirts, maybe.

i would be interested by it too. but i'm not buying 10 fucking shirts for it.

[Fox]

an argument against this is kids are the vast majority of the audience. they drop millions of dollars on this guy as a hero. could a turn pay off? if every adult that welcomed it bought 10 bad guy cena shirts, maybe.

i would be interested by it too. but i'm not buying 10 fucking shirts for it.

But going back to my previous analogy, that's no different than what WCW was in 95/96, and even going forward all the way to 98. I was only 9 or 10 around that time.

When Hogan turned they sold MORE merchandise. nWo merchandise exploded off the shelves. Everyone had an nWo t-shirt. But more so than that, the people who stood up to face off against Hogan and his nWo cronies sold merchandise too. They became bigger stars just by opposing Hogan and the nWo. Sting, DDP, Goldberg - these guys sold tons of merchandise.

Yes, there is a potential for merchandise loss if John Cena turned. It's almost unavoidable. But as long as his new character also came with a new logo and new gimmick, then that means new t-shirts, and fans of the heel Cena character will eat that stuff up. And if the Summer of Punk proved anything, it's that as long as you have a cool t-shirt like the Best In the World shirt, the guy who goes against John Cena is going to sell merchandise, too.

People look at the situation of Cena turning heel with a very narrow point of view. "Oh, they'll lose merchandise sales and they'll lose this and they'll lose that." What people don't realize is that a Cena heel turn would be good for business because it means better storylines, the elevation of guys into Cena's spot and merchandise sales for those guys, and a huge potential for better PPV buyrates and better TV ratings. What they would lose in the kiddie Cena fan base (which is growing up into teenhood very rapidly, I might add) would be gained back two-fold in other areas.

[#1-norm-fan]

John Cena should win Money in the Bank at the PPV, and then CM Punk and he start their tension. Punk tells Cena that he's going to cash in just like everyone else. Cena says "I'm not like you -- I've got hustle, loyalty and respect" and all that jazz. On the 1000th edition of RAW, Punk and Bryan have a Submission Match or something like that, and in a rage, some heels attack Punk (perhaps a freshly turned Zack Ryder with Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks... more on that in a second) and Cena runs out for the save. Cena then nails Punk with his briefcase and cashes in, becoming the 11-time WWE Champion.

This really sets the build for Cena vs. Punk at SummerSlam into motion. Punk would actually have a moral case against Cena, who has not turned heel, but has shown himself to be human and capable of going against what he preaches sometimes.

Pretty sure that would constitute a heel turn if he preaches doing the right thing by not cashing in in a weasel-like fashion and then proceeds to do just that.

If you're going face vs. face, Cena is going to go right back to getting booed heavily and being resented by half the crowd for taking the title away from Punk.

[Wehttam]

hmmmm here is another thread that mr c. just completely plagiarized....

MORE EVIDENCE FOR THE PEOPLE:

a few hours after this is posted on rajah... (Thread titled: How do you make the matches matter?)

(spoilered due to long quote-age)After quite a few years as a huge fans of professional wrestling (mostly WWF/E), I've heard quite a few complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most television matches seems to matter. With the exception of matches that are clearly defined as Championship or No. 1 Contender's matches, very few of the outcomes of matches shown on television (even a lot of pay-per-view matches) have any effect on a wrestler's place on the card or his standing in relation to the WWE or World Championship.

Sure, it's easy to spot a wrestler's place on the card by the amount of television time devoted to him and the placement of his matches on the television show and pay-per-views, and it's obvious that the more TV time he's garnering, the closer he is to getting one of the belts. But winning and losing doesn't seem to have much of an effect on the chase for the title belts. Consequently, it's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and Smackdown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much (again, unless a title match or the belt itself is specifically on the line).

When I watch my favorite baseball or football team play, I care deeply about whether they win or lose, because I know how winning or losing affects their chances at winning a championship. I don't feel that way about my favorite wrestlers, though, because there is a disconnect between winning or losing on RAW and getting a title shot.

I could think of multiple examples, but the one that sticks out most in the current product is Dolph Ziggler. Like most of the IWC folks, I'm a big Dolph fan, and I think he's a future star of the company. And based on the amount of TV time he's received for the last year, I think WWE feels the same way. He is one of the few guys nowadays that I stop and watch every time he's on screen.

And I was happy to see him get a title shot at the last pay-per-view, but it hit me: besides winning the No. 1 Contender's match on RAW, what had he done to earn a title shot? It sure seemed like he had done a lot of jobbing lately (albeit mostly jobbing to main event guys). Sure enough, I checked a website that tracks win-loss records for televised WWE shows, and Ziggler has won only 11 of his 39 televised matches this year. He had lost his last nine televised matches (about two months' worth) before winning the No. 1 Contender's match.

Now, none of the "real" sports teams that I follow would be anywhere near a championship game if they had won only 11 of their 39 matches during the season. And although WWE doesn't acknowledge win-loss records, I feel like most fans know when a guy loses a lot.

And this isn't just a Ziggler argument. Very rarely does WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt.

So my question is this: does it even matter to you that most televised matches don't seem to affect the title hunt?

And if it does matter, what can WWE do to make matches seem relevant to the title hunt?


this thread and post come along...


After quite a few years as a fan of professional wrestling, I’ve heard complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most matches seems to matter. It's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and SmackDown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much. Very rarely does the WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt.

An Intercontinental title match should be an adequate RAW main event, but with having so much time to fill with content these days, it really won’t happen. I know the idea is that you’re in this business to become the WWE Champion, but not everyone there is the champion. That’s lost in creative, as well as some of the wrestlers who are just pegged to become stars right out the gate. Yes, I want guys like Dolph Ziggler and Wade Barrett to get the title and have a reign, but when they’re not challenging for the title or fighting John Cena, they’re lost in the shuffle.

cmon man. time for your own ideas.

[Wehttam]

well someone doesn't want to discuss in the open why he straight up steals other posts.... it is quite the odd behavior...

hmm mr. c, i'm sure if 'nobody cared', you wouldn't neg rep me. i wonder where you copied that statement from anyway....

[Mr. Nerfect]

Pretty sure that would constitute a heel turn if he preaches doing the right thing by not cashing in in a weasel-like fashion and then proceeds to do just that.

If you're going face vs. face, Cena is going to go right back to getting booed heavily and being resented by half the crowd for taking the title away from Punk.

No it wouldn't. Cena would get people talking without actually turning.

John Cena wins the WWE Championship Money in the Bank, knocking Chris Jericho off the ladder last, onto Kane and Big Show, pulling the briefcase down and earning a title shot any time he wants in the coming year. Later in the show Josh Mathews in interviewing Cena when CM Punk walks onto the scene.

"Congratulations John. You beat four former WWE Champions (I see The Miz and Rey Mysterio making surprise returns) to earn a shot at me and the WWE Title whenever you want. So pal -- when is it going to be? After I go through hell and back with Daniel Bryan tonight, are you going to run out and cash in?"

"If I were you, Punk, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd be worrying about Daniel Bryan and that nutjob that's reffing your match tonight. But for the record -- hustle, loyalty, respect -- when I'm comin', Punk -- you'll know it."

That night, Punk and Bryan have their longest WWE match yet, and Bryan eventually gets into AJ's face, so she kicks him in the balls which allows Punk to hit the GTS and retain the WWE Title. AJ then skips off as Punk celebrates. John Cena coming out and applauding Punk from the ramp is optional.

The story heading into the 1000th RAW is then Daniel Bryan complaining that he was screwed over by AJ and should get yet another shot at the WWE Title. Perhaps Christian could come out on the first RAW and say tell Bryan that "You remind me of someone" and the two can have a great TV match heading into the 1000th RAW, where guest GM whoever announces Bryan will get another shot against CM Punk -- perhaps the Submission Match people have rumoured they'd have. Punk manages to make Bryan submit to the Anaconda Vise -- ending their feud -- but a pissed off Bryan attacks Punk from behind and tosses him around the ring, maybe yelling "You are not better than me!" Cena runs out for the save and cracks his briefcase over the head of Bryan, knocking him out of the ring and to the floor. Cena then regards the hurt Punk in the ring.

John Cena, in his John Cena way, would look at Punk, then down at his briefcase, then down at Punk, then at his briefcase. He then looks at the audience -- some of them cheering and some of them booing. Cena then blasts Punk over the head with it. Michael Cole starts going off on commentary "Cena is cashing in!" and then King says "No Cole -- he's just sending a message to Punk, Cena won't cash in like this." Cena then pulls the referee aside who talks to Justin Roberts, and Roberts announces that Cena is cashing in! Michael Cole stresses that "Cena is cashing in!" as King freaks out: "Whaaaaat?!?" "Cena's cashing in! Cena's cashing in!" Cena then hits Punk with an Attitude Adjustment and the referee counts Punk down and Cena is the new WWE Champion.

Cole immediately starts calling Cena on being a liar: "Cena said that Punk would see it coming!" and King plays it off "Punk did see the briefcase -- right before it cracked him in the head!" and then goes on to explain that "Cena had every right to cash in as he did," as Cole calls King a "John Cena sympathizer."

The following week, John Cena opens the show and says he has some explaining to do. Cena says that Punk owes his first two World Championships to the exact same method that John Cena earned at Money in the Bank by beating four former WWE Champions. Cena says that he knows he ruffled a few people's feathers by cashing in the way he did -- but how does that make John Cena any different from any other Money in the Bank Winner. All he did was exactly what anyone else of sane mind would do. It was also important that CM Punk did not see it coming.

Punk interrupts Cena and says that he's not upset that Cena cashed in the way he did. In fact, he feels validated. He's forever been saying that Cena is nothing but a phony. "Hustle, loyalty, respect -- they're just mantras you mouth off to sell t-shirts for Vince and Hunter, John. But when I say I'm The Best in the World, I mean it." Cena refers to the WWE Championship and tells Punk that this says he's lying. Cena then says that he knows Punk would have done the exact same thing if he was in Cena's shoes, and everybody knows it -- he did it twice before. All Cena did was give Punk a dose of his own medicine. Punk doesn't give a damn about this company or the WWE Championship -- he held it at ransom last year! Cena says that Punk is the biggest phony out here, and he's been a phony since he started calling himself "The Best in the World."

Cue SummerSlam match.

[Gertner]

But going back to my previous analogy, that's no different than what WCW was in 95/96, and even going forward all the way to 98. I was only 9 or 10 around that time.

When Hogan turned they sold MORE merchandise. nWo merchandise exploded off the shelves. Everyone had an nWo t-shirt. But more so than that, the people who stood up to face off against Hogan and his nWo cronies sold merchandise too. They became bigger stars just by opposing Hogan and the nWo. Sting, DDP, Goldberg - these guys sold tons of merchandise.

Yes, there is a potential for merchandise loss if John Cena turned. It's almost unavoidable. But as long as his new character also came with a new logo and new gimmick, then that means new t-shirts, and fans of the heel Cena character will eat that stuff up. And if the Summer of Punk proved anything, it's that as long as you have a cool t-shirt like the Best In the World shirt, the guy who goes against John Cena is going to sell merchandise, too.

People look at the situation of Cena turning heel with a very narrow point of view. "Oh, they'll lose merchandise sales and they'll lose this and they'll lose that." What people don't realize is that a Cena heel turn would be good for business because it means better storylines, the elevation of guys into Cena's spot and merchandise sales for those guys, and a huge potential for better PPV buyrates and better TV ratings. What they would lose in the kiddie Cena fan base (which is growing up into teenhood very rapidly, I might add) would be gained back two-fold in other areas.

Big difference. Hogan is a crossover, iconic character. One of the most recognizable people in the world. Cena isn't remotely close to his level. Cena turning heel would draw no new fans. It'd just shuffle the chairs of the existing fans, because wrestling isn't that big anymore. People aren't tired of Cena and the ones who are boo him mercilessly, which validates not turning him heel because he draws a massive reaction anyway.