View Full Version : Undefeated streaks..
Jaton
10-10-2006, 10:29 PM
What is the point of these undefeated streaks in WWE? Especially when they just end for no apparent reason, it's annoying. WWE really doesn't know how to build up some characters, so they decide to give them undefeated streaks and then end them and never mention it again? It's fucking stupid, and it's ruining the entire luster of having an undefeated streak.
Seriously, when Samoa Joe loses, it'll actually be a big deal. (To those who watch TNA)
Who's going to care when Umaga loses?
Mr. Aristocrat
10-10-2006, 10:38 PM
He lost in a House Show this weekend, Kennedy lost to Matt Hardy on SmackDown and never even had another match with him, and I still don't remember who ended Tatanka's streak, but it ended and he never won again. :p
Jaton
10-10-2006, 10:47 PM
See? That kind of shit makes absolutely no sense.
Destor
10-10-2006, 10:53 PM
Umaga is undefeated, house shows mean nothing. Kenned's was bull, but some people like Thorn tonight. His streak wasn't because they were pushing him as undefeated, they were just pushing him. Him not loosing was just to get him over. Same with Punk.
Übermensch
10-10-2006, 10:57 PM
Ludvig Borga ended Tatanka's streak, they were trying (unsuccesfully) to push him at the time.
Übermensch
10-10-2006, 11:14 PM
Anyhow, while it's true that some undefeated streaks are pretty pointless, I don't really see them as doing too much harm. There are varying degrees that undefeated steaks can be pushed. Kennedy's streak may have helped him get over, but even with it, he wasn't pushed as an absolute monster, and it should have been clear to be anybody watching that he wasn't going to capture the World Title anytime soon. He's just a solid upper midcarder, and his streak was a good way of lending him credibility. While I disagree with the manner that they ended his streak, the idea should be to have somebody end it when they're firmly established in the optimal position on the card desired. This should either be done by having the streak ended in a feud that they will ultimatly win, or by coming up just short in a match with somebody who is slightly above them on the ladder. One of the key points is that the streak isn't central to the wrestler, it's just supplementary.
A guy like Goldberg on the other hand, like him or not, was clearly headed toward the main event from almost day one, and the streak was central to his charecter. Even in this case though, it serves a similar purpose to the first kind, since the streak will inevitably end at some point. The important thing though, is that a monster streak for a guy like Goldberg, when they're pushed heavily enough, isn't going to be cheapened by a Kennedy streak, since they're being pushed on entirely different levels.
Pepsi Man
10-10-2006, 11:17 PM
He lost in a House Show this weekend, Kennedy lost to Matt Hardy on SmackDown and never even had another match with him, and I still don't remember who ended Tatanka's streak, but it ended and he never won again. :p
Kennedy got that win back after he was done feuding with Batista.
Anybody Thrilla
10-10-2006, 11:21 PM
Anyhow, while it's true that some undefeated streaks are pretty pointless, I don't really see them as doing too much harm. There are varying degrees that undefeated steaks can be pushed. Kennedy's streak may have helped him get over, but even with it, he wasn't pushed as an absolute monster, and it should have been clear to be anybody watching that he wasn't going to capture the World Title anytime soon. He's just a solid upper midcarder, and his streak was a good way of lending him credibility. While I disagree with the manner that they ended his streak, the idea should be to have somebody end it when they're firmly established in the optimal position on the card desired. This should either be done by having the streak ended in a feud that they will ultimatly win, or by coming up just short in a match with somebody who is slightly above them on the ladder. One of the key points is that the streak isn't central to the wrestler, it's just supplementary.
A guy like Goldberg on the other hand, like him or not, was clearly headed toward the main event from almost day one, and the streak was central to his charecter. Even in this case though, it serves a similar purpose to the first kind, since the streak will inevitably end at some point. The important thing though, is that a monster streak for a guy like Goldberg, when they're pushed heavily enough, isn't going to be cheapened by a Kennedy streak, since they're being pushed on entirely different levels.
This is so correct that the thread should now be closed.
Lesnar had a pretty decent streak, which added a lot to his character but IIRC he got pinned by kurt angle out of nowhere with a roll up when kurt used his brother to confuse him before wrestlemania
Skippord
10-11-2006, 02:00 AM
I'll throw a party when Samoa Joe loses
and when Umaga loses
FaceOfDeath
10-11-2006, 02:20 AM
They use undefeated streaks to build up to an explosive match in the end. THINK!!
FaceOfDeath
10-11-2006, 02:21 AM
This is Q & A forums material too!!
Pepsi Man
10-11-2006, 02:25 AM
Lesnar had a pretty decent streak, which added a lot to his character but IIRC he got pinned by kurt angle out of nowhere with a roll up when kurt used his brother to confuse him before wrestlemania
Actually, Lesnar had a couple of DQ losses way before that, one to RVD, if I remember correctly, for the Intercontinental Title, and another that was a Handicapped Match against the Hardy Boyz. I remember that that was allegedly a "punishment" for Lesnar for his part in an altercation with Curt Hennig as part of the "plane ride from hell".
(not to mention him losing the title to Big Show at the 2002 Survivor Series)
Actually, Lesnar had a couple of DQ losses way before that, one to RVD, if I remember correctly, for the Intercontinental Title, and another that was a Handicapped Match against the Hardy Boyz. I remember that that was allegedly a "punishment" for Lesnar for his part in an altercation with Curt Hennig as part of the "plane ride from hell".
(not to mention him losing the title to Big Show at the 2002 Survivor Series)
well i meant pinfall or submission losses really
Pepsi Man
10-11-2006, 02:38 AM
well i meant pinfall or submission losses really
He still lost by pinfall to lose the title at the 2002 Survivor Series.
Londoner
10-11-2006, 11:42 AM
I only care about undefeated streaks when the wrestler isn't facing jobbers.
Disturbed316
10-11-2006, 11:48 AM
I think Goldberg's streak was the only one I can remember recently where it wasn't cheapened by DQ loses or losing in three way matches ala Joe.
I'm pretty sure thats the same for Tatanka, I cant ever remember him losing by DQ or countdown back in the day.
Didn't Sid have a huge winning streak in WCW? :shifty:
And one big streak when he was in the WWF? :shifty:
Disturbed316
10-11-2006, 11:53 AM
Nah, although Sid was in main event for awhile in WCW, so you could say that was where he got his big break.
Anybody Thrilla
10-11-2006, 12:18 PM
He main evented in the WW(F) too, ya know.
Pepsi Man
10-11-2006, 12:36 PM
He main evented in the WW(F) too, ya know.
Beat Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels in back to back months, no less.
McLegend
10-11-2006, 12:37 PM
He hit jose Litrhio with a TV camera and cost HBK the title.
That son of a bitch :mad:
Anybody Thrilla
10-11-2006, 12:39 PM
It wasn't so much 'costing' HBK the title as it was 'gaining' the title for himself.
Anybody Thrilla
10-11-2006, 12:39 PM
But I think we all know the height of Sid's career was Wrestlemania 13.
Pepsi Man
10-11-2006, 12:40 PM
He hit jose Litrhio with a TV camera as well and cost HBK the title.
That son of a bitch :mad:
Hey, they don't call him "Psycho Sid" for nothing.
McLegend
10-11-2006, 12:41 PM
It wasn't so much 'costing' HBK the title as it was 'gaining' the title for himself.
No it wasn't. It was assault the muthafucka should have went to jail.
Nah, although Sid was in main event for awhile in WCW, so you could say that was where he got his big break.
LOL, I get it!
Jeritron
10-12-2006, 02:39 AM
Goldbergs undefeated streak is the only undefeated streak I can think of that essentially made a wrestler, since it was him being pushed to the sky right out of the gates. Other than that undefeated streaks don't really matter much to me, but I also dont see any harm in them. If its helping than so be it, and if they're getting over otherwise and its coincidental or additional then so be it.
It certainly seems to be helping Umaga, who I couldnt care less about, but care much more about him because hes still undefeated. I think just about everyone thinks he sucks, but a lot pay attention because of his streak. It'll prob even lead up to a payoff in a main event. Maybe against Cena for the title in the next few months or even Undertaker at Wrestlemania or something, and the streak will be snapped, and Umaga will be buried and fade off into obscurity. A shame? No. Pointless? Maybe. Effective? Yes.
FaceOfDeath
10-12-2006, 03:33 AM
Goldbergs undefeated streak is the only undefeated streak I can think of that essentially made a wrestler, since it was him being pushed to the sky right out of the gates. Other than that undefeated streaks don't really matter much to me, but I also dont see any harm in them. If its helping than so be it, and if they're getting over otherwise and its coincidental or additional then so be it.
It certainly seems to be helping Umaga, who I couldnt care less about, but care much more about him because hes still undefeated. I think just about everyone thinks he sucks, but a lot pay attention because of his streak. It'll prob even lead up to a payoff in a main event. Maybe against Cena for the title in the next few months or even Undertaker at Wrestlemania or something, and the streak will be snapped, and Umaga will be buried and fade off into obscurity. A shame? No. Pointless? Maybe. Effective? Yes.
He'll be released or he'll be killed off.
Lara Emily
10-12-2006, 03:55 AM
Didn't Sid have a huge winning streak in WCW? :shifty:
And one big streak when he was in the WWF? :shifty:
they did run a Sid is going to beat Goldberg's winning streak angle, where they kept adding phantom wins to his total, he went from like 120 to 150 in a week or something equally stupid like that
Disturbed316
10-12-2006, 09:08 AM
LOL, I get it!
I think you were the only one :mad:
Jeritron
10-12-2006, 09:18 AM
I got it, it "cracked" me up. I know Sid's prone to "snap", but I still cringe.
Pepsi Man
10-12-2006, 09:47 AM
they did run a Sid is going to beat Goldberg's winning streak angle, where they kept adding phantom wins to his total, he went from like 120 to 150 in a week or something equally stupid like that
That was Sid that did that?
Kane Knight
10-12-2006, 03:26 PM
It's not the winning/.undefeated streaks that are the problem. It's the fact that WWE can't book things that make us care. It's not just the win/loss streaks, it's the characters, the finishes, the PPVs. and well, everything else. Winning streaks would mean something if they ever learned how to book with consistancy.
Stickman
10-12-2006, 05:28 PM
DOes anybody care about Umaga's streak? Does anybody care about Umaga? When will he be fired? I give it 4 months until they run out of ideas for him. That's being generous.
Kane Knight
10-12-2006, 05:48 PM
I think they've already run out of ideas for him.
Idea 1: Give him a manager who says something over and over.
Idea 2: Have him win. a lot.
Mister Sinister
10-12-2006, 06:43 PM
Also...For the record, Christian Cage, has yet to be pinned for forced to submit in a TNA Ring...granted, I fear I just jinx him.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.